ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1180/96 by James Provan (PPE) to the Commission (15 May 1996)

Subject: Debt in the developing countries

Is the Commission considering proposals to reduce the international debt cost faced by many developing countries, so that programmes for healthcare and education can be funded and economic development allowed to begin?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (17 June 1996)

The Commission is concerned with the debt burden faced by many developing countries and that of the heavily indebted countries in particular. Their debt can be considered an obstacle to development, since debt service takes up a large part of scarce budget resources. The Commission is closely following the debt situation of the ACP countries and is taking a keen interest in the recent proposal by the International monetary fund and the World bank for further debt relief for the heavily indebted poor countries with an unsustainable debt burden.

The Community has in various international forums endeavoured to obtain a more systematic consideration of the debt problems of the developing countries and has already taken measures to reduce the debt burden of the ACP states. Since Lomé IV, all European development fund assistance, except risk capital, is given in grant form. Furthermore, during the mid-term revision of the Lomé IV convention, the Community reaffirmed its willingness to contribute constructively and actively to the alleviation of the debt burden of the ACP states and decided to transform into grants all special loans under previous conventions which had not yet been committed. Thus, another 150 MECU became available to these countries in grant form.

In more general terms, it is important to mobilize and maintain aid flows to the heavily indebted countries, while not diverting resources from other developing countries. The Community is a large donor of development assistance to many of the heavily indebted developing countries. Through its development assistance and its structural adjustment support in particular, technical assistance and its policy dialogue with the developing countries, the Community is supporting these countries' efforts to undertake economic reforms with a view to achieve sustained growth and development. The Community in its support for structural adjustment gives strong emphasis to support to health and education expenditures and 70% of counterpart funds from the Community support for structural adjustment are channelled to these sectors.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0864/96 by Miguel Arias Cañete (PPE) to the Commission (12 April 1996)

Subject: Garlic imported from China and Vietnam

In 1993, import certificates and a safeguard clause were introduced in respect of garlic imported from China and Vietnam on account of the crisis experienced by Community importers, since the price of garlic from the two countries in question is much lower than the Community production cost. Community garlic producers are still in a difficult position and the period of application of the measures introduced expires on 31 May 1996. Moreover, irregularities have been noted as regards the actual origin of imported products, particularly those from Taiwan.

Could the Commission therefore say whether it intends to extend the safeguard clause applicable to garlic imported from China and Vietnam and what action it intends to take to ensure effective monitoring of the actual origin of imported products?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (15 May 1996)

The Commission is currently reviewing how the 1995/96 marketing year is proceeding in the garlic sector and looking at the results of applying the protective measures in respect of imports from China and Vietnam.

This exercise has not yet been completed. Only when it is will the Commission give a decision on the measures required for 1996/97.

As regards product origin questions, the Commission would point out that Regulation (EC) No 1084/95 ((OJ L 109, 16.5.1995. )) requires a certificate of origin from the Taiwanese authorities for garlic imported from Taiwan. The purpose of the certificate it to attest to the origin of the product.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0999/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (26 April 1996)

Subject: Participation of the voluntary sector in UK Social Fund projects

Does the Commission accept that ESF projects undertaken by local voluntary organizations may be at higher cost than equivalent projects undertaken by larger institutions such as colleges or private training organizations who are able to spread administrative costs, but which may be more effective in ensuring the participation of marginalized groups and thus of increased effectiveness?

Will the Commission undertake discussions with the UK Government to ensure such local voluntary sector projects are not eradicated by too narrow focus on cost issues under its proposed regionalization of ESF in the UK?

Will the Commission press the UK Government for a minimum quota allocation for voluntary sector projects in each region for the first year of operation?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (13 June 1996)

The background to current discussions on the regionalization of European social fund (ESF) actions in the United Kingdom, and the implications of this for local voluntary organization, is the submission to the Commission by the United Kingdom authorities of their plan for objective 3 for the period 1997-1999. The timetable and arrangements for regionalization will be discussed between the Commission and the United Kingdom authorities in negotiations on the new single programming document (SPD) to be held in the coming months.

What is already clear is that the new SPD, in line with the principle of partnership, will include specific arrangements for the joint devolved management of the programme. As with all single programming documents, the SPD monitoring committee will remain the responsible authority. The Commission is represented on all monitoring committees, but has no specific authority over the selection of projects, which is carried out according to rigorous selection criteria.

The Commission will continue to ensure that, in drawing up project selection criteria, the partnership takes account of factors other than cost alone. The Commission is of the opinion that project selection criteria agreed at the regional level, within a broad national framework, will increase the transparency of project selection. Moreover, such criteria should also assess the extent to which high quality projects are addressing the needs of the key sub-target groups identified under the objective 3 SPD. It is the firm intention of the Commission that the new SPD should facilitate the provision of high quality projects addressing the clearly identified needs of the long-term unemployed, unemployed young people with few or no qualifications, those at risk of exclusion from the labour market, and potential beneficiaries of equal opportunities measures.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0792/96 by Peter Crampton (PSE) to the Commission (3 April 1996)

Subject: Impact of industrial fishing

In view of the huge amount of biomass currently being removed from the North Sea in order to produce margarine or food for fish farms, what does the Commission consider will be the precise biological effects of this on the ecosystem of the North Sea in the future?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (8 May 1996)

At present there is little or no scientific evidence that the current level of industrial fishing is deleterious to the fish stocks concerned. It must be said, however, that very little is actually known about the effect of industrial fisheries on the North Sea ecosystem. The Commission is currently funding research related to this subject (e.g. effects of industrial fisheries on the food chain).

It should also be pointed out that industrial fisheries are subject to regulation, and therefore to control and enforcement under the competence of Member States. Denmark and Sweden respectively have developed or are currently developing monitoring systems aimed specifically at industrial landings.

The current poor state of a large number of commercially important North Sea fish stocks is due to a very large extent to heavy fishing for human consumption. The current bycatches of cod and haddock, subsequently discarded, in the human consumption fisheries are possibly having equally large adverse effects on the stocks of these species, as are bycatches of juvenile cod and haddock in industrial fisheries.

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its reports on industrial fisheries in the North Sea and Skagerrak and Kattegat and on the biological impact of industrial fisheries in these areas ((SEC (92) 2046 )), and to its communication to the Council on the biological impact of fisheries ((COM(95) 40 )).

Finally, the Commission would remind the Honourable Member of the intermediate ministerial meeting within the framework of the North Sea Conference, to be held in March 1997, when the subject of ecologically sustainable and responsible fisheries in the North Sea will be the major topic of discussion.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1390/96 by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission (6 June 1996)

Subject: Problems of small tea producers in India

1. Is the Commission aware that as a consequence of the fall in tea prices on the international market, small tea producers in South India now face serious problems, with the result that the wages of women in this sector have fallen sharply and poverty among families has risen steeply?

2. Is the Commission aware that child-labour in used extensively in this sector, and that as a consequence of the price fall there has been even more switching over to child-labour at wages much lower even than those paid to women?

3. Is the Commission prepared, within the framework of the Generalized Preferences Scheme, to set up an inquiry into working conditions for women and children in this sector in India?

4. Is the Commission prepared to investigate whether assistance can be given to small producers, for example by developing a hallmark to promote fair trade in tea, supporting tea cooperatives in the South that are producing in a socially and ecologically responsible fashion and providing cooperative credit and offering education for women tea workers and small tea producers?

5. Will the Commission take steps to ensure that henceforth only 'fair trade' tea will be sold on the premises of European Union institutions?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (15 July 1996)

1. The Commission is aware of the problems facing the tea industry as a result of the decline in world tea prices over the last fifteen years, and that 1994 was a particularly bad year. The Commission shares the concern of the Honourable Member about the impact this had on the wages of women employed in the sector.

2. In effect, women constitute a major part of the workforce in the tea sector and the risk of their replacement by cheaper child labour is real. In order to combat exploitative practices in the tea industry and elsewhere, the Commission is currently reinforcing its links with the International labour office (ILO) through the International programme for the elimination of child labour (IPEC) which aims to ensure that the use of child labour conforms to international conventions. The Commission feels that such positive measures could prove more constructive than introducing trade barriers against certain producers which tend to deflate prices and only further encourage the exploitative use of child labour.

3. Council Regulations (EC) No 3281/94 ((OJ L 348, 31.12.1994. )) and (EC) No 1256/96 ((OJ L 160, 29.6.1996. )), which apply the multiannual scheme of preferences in the industrial and agricultural sectors respectively, give the Commission no powers to undertake an investigation into the labour practices of which the Honourable Member complains.

4. The possibility of granting a quality mark should be studied carefully. The first results of quality labelling for tropical timbers and carpets will have to be examined in order to evaluate the performance of such schemes.

5. The Commission could re-examine its purchase of tea if a quality mark is introduced but cannot speak on behalf of the other European institutions.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1109/96 by José Barros Moura (PSE) to the Commission (13 May 1996)

Subject: Free movement of workers in Germany

It was reported in the media on 16 April 1996 that German civil construction companies were cancelling properly concluded work contracts with Portuguese workers exercising the freedom of movement for workers and that the same companies were then meeting their labour requirements by resorting to subcontractors who were recruiting workers in Portugal on wages and conditions lower than those applicable in Germany.

What measures will the Commission take to ensure that the free movement of workers is respected and neutralize this evidently fraudulent practice?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (17 June 1996)

The Honourable Member's question mainly concerns the situation of Portuguese workers who move to Germany territory under a contract of employment concluded with their employer established in Germany.

These workers exercise the right to freedom of movement within the meaning of Article 48 of the EC Treaty and hence benefit from the ban on any discrimination based on nationality in regard to conditions of work and pay and, notably, provisions concerning dismissal, as provided for in Article 7(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 ((OJ L 257, 19.10.1968. )). In the event of discrimination between a Portuguese worker and a German worker, the former is entitled to exercise his right to non-discrimination in the framework of national law.

Things are different when the workers, in this case Portuguese workers, are placed at the disposal of a firm established in Germany by their firm situated in Portugal. In cases in which the contract of employment between the Portuguese workers and the employer is maintained during the posting in Germany, the situation of these workers raises the question as to the law applicable to their contract of employment. Here we have a conflicts of laws between German law and Portuguese law.

Currently, the solutions to this problem must be sought in the Rome Convention of 1980 on the law applicable to contractual obligations. However, the Commission wishes to emphasise the existence of a proposal for a Directive concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services ((Doc. COM(93) 225. )), which was recently the subject of a Council common position.

Pursuant to this common position, firms which post workers in the framework of the provision of services to the territory of another Member State must respect a certain number of minimum and binding rules of labour law in force in that Member State. These rules include, in particular, those relating to the conditions applicable to the secondment of workers and the minimum wage.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0282/96 by Christoph Konrad (PPE) to the Council (27 February 1996)

Subject: Structure and role of the military arm of the Common Foreign and Security Policy

1. What structure and what role should the military arm of the European Union be given pursuant to the Common Foreign and Security Policy, as set out in Articles J.5 and J.8(3) of the Treaty on European Union?

2. What are the Council's views on military law governing a future European army?

3. How will the Council guarantee the right of association of members of armed forces in Europe?

4. What action will the Council take to guarantee the statutory and social rights of soldiers in Europe, in particular those of integrated European units?

Reply (2 August 1996)

The Honourable Member will note that Articles J.5 and J.8(3) of the Treaty on European Union do not refer to the "structure and role of the military arm of the Common Foreign and Security Policy".

While taking into account the specific character of the security and defence policy of certain Member States, as stated in Article J.4(4), Article J.4(2) of the Treaty on European Union stipulates that "the Union requests the Western European Union (WEU), which is an integral part of the development of the Union, to elaborate and implement decisions and actions of the Union which have defence implications.". The role of the WEU as the defence component of the European Union and as a means to strengthen the European pillar of the Atlantic Alliance is also dealt with in the two declarations on the Western European Union included in the Final Act signed at Maastricht on 7 February 1992.

Questions raised by the Honourable Member under 2, 3 and 4 have not been referred to the Council.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1217/96 by Anne McIntosh (PPE) to the Council (8 May 1996)

Subject: EC ban on CFCs

Will the Council amend the 1994 EC Directive (94/1/EC ((OJ L 23, 28.1.1994, p. 28. ))) banning CFCs to include a derogation for Beconase nasal spray?

As a derogation has already been granted for Becotide, Beclaforte and Ventolin, one should also be granted for Beconase. Does not the Council agree?

Does not the Council realize that possible substitutes containing water or brine have proved ineffective, causing the swelling of the membrane and the seizing up of the nostrils?

What little CFC is emitted by Beconase is directly ingested by the patient and not released into the atmosphere. There can, therefore, be no real justification for banning this product on environmental grounds.

Reply (7 August 1996)

The Council would remind the Honourable Member that the Directive to which she refers was adopted by the Commission in order to adapt to technical progress Council Directive 75/324/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to aerosol dispensers. The Council does not therefore have the necessary information to answer her questions.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0796/96 by Hartmut Nassauer (PPE) to the Council (12 April 1996)

Subject: Convention on simplified extradition procedure between the Member States of the European Union, adopted on 10 March 1995

For each Member State, will the Council give the progress of ratification procedures as at 1 March 1996 for the Convention on simplified extradition procedure between the Member States of the European Union, adopted on 10 March 1995 ((OJ C 78, 30.3.1995, p. 2. )).

Reply (7 August 1996)

The Council is not able to indicate the progress of ratification procedure as at 1 March 1996 for the Convention on simplified extradition procedure between the Member States of the European Union, adopted on 10 March 1995.

However, the Council can state that no Member State has ratified the Convention to date.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0938/96 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Commission (26 April 1996)

Subject: Public procurement directives

Which Member States of the European Union have not incorporated the directives regulating public procurement into their national legislation?

Some technical rules introduced as part of the process of incorporating these directives impede fair competition in public requests for tenders. The Commission has opened 31 proceedings in this connection. Against which countries have proceedings been initiated on these grounds?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (3 June 1996)

A table summarizing the situation with regard to transposal of the public procurement directives in the fifteen Member States is being sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat. It covers not only infringement proceedings for failure to communicate national transposal measures but also cases in which Community provisions have not been properly transposed.

As the table shows, eleven cases of failure to communicate measures and eighteen cases of improper transposal are currently the subject of proceedings.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1218/96 by María Sornosa Martínez (GUE/NGL) to the Council (8 May 1996)

Subject: Communitarizing spatial planning policy

There are more and more situations like the one we have just seen in the Valencian Autonomous Community in Spain, where a government proposal to change the law concerning land which cannot be built on has given rise to alarm amongst ecological groups and the population at large.

Does the Council believe that a spatial planning policy designed to safeguard the environment is required at Community level?

Does the Council intend to consider what such a policy might consist of during the Intergovernmental Conference on revising the Treaties?

If the Council has any drafts on this subject, would it supply me with copies?

Reply (7 August 1996)

It is not for the Council to comment on the domestic politics of a Member State, as is the case with the Government proposal to change the law mentioned by the Honourable Member.

As regards the amendment of the Treaty requested by the Honourable Member, the Council as such is not competent to intervene. That is the responsibility of the Intergovernmental Conference, which, as its name suggests, is a conference of the Governments of the Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0821/96 by Edith Müller (V) to the Council (2 April 1996)

Subject: Financing the Common Foreign and security Policy/Powers of the European Court of Auditors

In its decision on a joint action with regard to the participation of the European Union in the implementing structures of the peace plan for Bosnia-Herzegovina (95/545/CFSP ((OJ L 309, 21.12.1995, p. 2. )) of 11 December 1995), the Council provides for a maximum of ECU 10 million to be charged to the Community budget for the operational expenses of the High Representative, Carl Bildt. There is no explicit mention in the decision of the European Court of Auditors. Other decisions on joint action, notably those connected with the administration of the town of Mortar, have included an explicit request to the Court of Auditors to audit the accounts. Why has the Council not included this reference in respect of the High Representative? Has the Council realised that there is no need for any such reference because expenditure charged to the Community budget is in general subject to scrutiny by the Court of Auditors pursuant to Article 188c of the EC Treaty?

Reply (7 August 1996)

To the Council's mind, the execution of expenditure charged to the Community budget is in every case subject to scrutiny by the Court of Auditors as provided for in the Treaty.

The joint action with regard to the participation of the Union in the implementing structures of the peace plan for Bosnia-Herzegovina involved a contribution from the Union to the operational expenses of the High Representative, who received his mandate not just from the European Union but from the United Nations as well. That being so, it is not for the Council to insist on scrutiny of Mr Bildt's budget by the Court of Auditors.