ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1835/97 by Mirja Ryynänen (ELDR) to the Commission (27 May 1997)

Subject: Taking account of climate in EU deadlines for harvesting and for aid applications

Under Commission rules, Finnish arable farmers are required to submit their aid applications by the end of May. In the C aid area, notification of harvests may be delayed until 15 June, but not in the A and B areas. As spring is late again in Finland this year, it will not be possible for crops to be harvested until June even on many farms in A and B areas.

The fixed harvesting deadlines set by the Commission for A and B areas do not make sense in the difficult conditions which prevail in the north. Some permanent way should be found of introducing flexibility in connection with this significant problem, which affects tens of thousands of farmers, so as to ensure that it, and the resultant uncertainty, does not continue to recur year after year.

What will the Commission do to eliminate the excessively strict enforcement of harvesting deadlines for northern conditions and to increase flexibility by other means than special decisions adopted each year, which cause uncertainty?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (12 June 1997)

The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that the deadline for 1997 has been extended to 15 June 1997 for the whole of Finland.

The Commission is aware of the special climatic features of the Nordic regions and their impact on the sowing date. When the sowing date for the 1997 harvest was put back, it underook to consider the possibility of fixing a more suitable date for the whole of Finland.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1758/97 by José Valverde López (PPE) to the Commission (27 May 1997)

Subject: Inspectorate of the markets in fruit and vegetables

The COM in fruit and vegetables provides for the establishment of an inspectorate of the markets in fruit and vegetables. What will the status of these inspectors be? How many of them will there be? What will their duties be?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (17 July 1997)

Article 40 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 ((OJ L 297, 21.11.1996. )) requires the Commission to establish a special corps of inspectors consisting of Commission officials and possibly of staff appointed at the latter's request by Member States to take part in specific enquiries.

Article 40 states that the corps will participate in checks carried out by the Member States' competent authorities and at the Commission's initiative carry out checks under Article 39 of the Regulation.

When the Regulation was proposed to the Council the Commission notified its intention of assigning 5 posts to the corps. So far only 2 have been assigned but on 3 March 1997 the Commission adopted a decision to assign a further 3 posts to give the number originally scheduled and so enable the corps to discharge the tasks charged to it by the Regulation. This decision awaits implementation.

The status of the inspectors would as initially planned be that of officials and other servants of the European Communities.

The participation of staff appointed by Member States (albeit in specific enquiries only) will substantially boost the special corps. The Commission has already written to each Member State asking for a list of national officials available to participate in inspection work. They would keep their national status. At least two persons per Member State are required.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2388/97 by Kirsi Piha (PPE) to the Commission (10 July 1997)

Subject: Ratification of the European Agreements

The European Agreements concluded between the former socialist countries of Eastern Europe and the European Union in 1995 laid the foundations for the next enlargement of the Union. The earliest possible ratification of the agreements in all the present Member States of the Union would facilitate the development of more institutionalized cooperation between the new applicant countries and the Union. Thus it is of fundamental importance to preparations for the EU accession negotiations in the applicant countries that the European Agreements should function well, helping to pave the way. It is therefore astonishing that Belgium and France have not yet ratified the European Agreements with all the Baltic States.

In view of the above, what will the Commission do to ensure that Belgium and France - the foot-draggers - ratify the agreements with the Baltic States without delay?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (31 July 1997)

The Commission has taken every opportunity to encourage the rapid ratification by Member States of the Europe agreements with the Baltic states. Although a significant part of the cooperation foreseen under the Europe agreements is already in place with these countries today, on the basis of the existing free trade agreements, and notwithstanding the fact that these countries are already fully participating in the pre-accession process, the entry into force of these Europe agreements would give an important signal of the extent of the Community's relations with these countries.

The Commission continues to encourage the speedy ratifications of the Europe agreements.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1735/97 by Dominique Baudis (PPE) to the Council (22 May 1997)

Subject: Joint European aircraft certification authority

Does the Dutch Presidency consider it appropriate to take measures as part of the Intergovernmental Conference to promote the establishment of a joint European aircraft certification authority, given the unanimous support for this idea expressed by the European Parliament in its resolution on European aeronautical research and technology (Doc A3-0426/92) ((OJ C 72, 15.3.1993, p. 173. ))?

Answer (25 September 1997)

On 16 December 1996, the Commission submitted to the Council a recommendation for a Council Decision authorizing the Commission to start negotiations on behalf of the Community with a view to establishing a European organization responsible for civil aviation safety.

The Council's subordinate bodies are currently in the process of examining this recommendation, particularly within the Working Party on Transport Questions at the level of the Directors-General of Civil Aviation.

Significant progress has been made on this issue and the Council, at its meeting to discuss transport matters on 17 and 18 June 1997, expressed general support for setting up a European organization responsible for civil aviation safety. The Council's bodies will continue to examine the question of establishing a joint European authority on civil aviation safety which, in line with the Commission's recommendation, would include among its tasks responsibility for aircraft certification.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1945/97 by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (4 June 1997)

Subject: BSE in The Netherlands

According to reports in the Finnish press, the first case of BSE in the Netherlands occurred a few weeks ago.

Does the Commission know whether this report is true, and if so, what does it intend to do to prevent the spread of the disease?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (5 August 1997)

The Commission was informed by the Dutch authorities immediately after confirmation of the first and again after the second case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) on its territory, on 21 March 1997 and 7 April 1997. At the same time the authorities in other Member States were informed by way of the animal disease notification system (ADNS), in accordance with Community rules. Subsequently the Dutch veterinary authorities reported on their findings and the measures taken, to the various meetings of the standing veterinary committee.

The measures taken were considered adequate by the Member States and the Commission in protecting public and animal health, against risk of exposure to the transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) agent resulting from these two outbreaks.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2343/97 by Hedy d'Ancona (PSE) to the Commission (10 July 1997)

Subject: Anti-Semitism in a Slovakian school textbook

1. Is the Commission aware of the existence of a textbook on Slovakian history for Slovakian primary schools which glosses over the mass deportation of Jews to the extermination camps?

2. Can the Commission confirm that this textbook, written by Milan Durica, a Catholic priest, has been published with money from the European Union?

3. If so, can the Commission indicate the programme under which these funds were provided? Can it also indicate how it monitors the use of such funds?

4. Does the Commission see any prospect of withdrawing the funding, and can it ensure that the book is taken out of circulation?

5. Does the Commission share the view that the message of this controversial textbook runs counter to the objectives of the European Year Against Racism?

6. What action is the Commission intending to take to ensure that in future aid to third countries is not misused for purposes which are at variance with the criteria for accession to the European Union in respect of democracy and civil rights?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (4 September 1997)

Under the Phare 'Renewal of education programme' for Slovakia, funding was provided for curriculum development. The Slovak ministry of education requested funding for the printing of a schoolbook on Slovak history, described as a chronological description of historical events to be used as a supplementary teaching aid. The request letter contained three recommendations of the book by historians teaching in Canada, Germany and Slovakia, all of Slovak origin. The Commission relied on the recommendations and approved funding (ECU 80,000) for the printing of the book.

When the Commission was made aware that the book contained offensive material of an antisemitic nature which misrepresented Slovakia's wartime role, it took immediate action. The responsible memeber of the Commission in a meeting with the Slovak Foreign Minister on 25 June 1991 requested urgently the withdrawal of the books from Slovak schools. Replying to this request the Slovak Prime Minister announced on 27 June 1997 in Amsterdam that the book would be withdrawn. On 1 July 1997 the Slovak ministry of education published a statement, saying that the book 'will not be used in the educational process'. On 2 July 1997, the Foreign Minister informed the Commission in a letter about this decision of the Ministry of education after the issue had been raised at a regular government meeting. The Commission has focused its efforts on having the book withdrawn rather than having the funds reimbursed.

The Commission agrees that the contents of this book run counter to the objectives and principles embodied in the 'year against racism'. The Commission stresses the importance of compliance with the democracy criterion set out at the Copenhagen Council in all its contacts and co-operation initiatives with applicant countries. Every effort is being made to support Slovakia in its objective to comply fully with this criterion.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2410/97 by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission (10 July 1997)

Subject: Compliance with the arms embargo on China

In 1989 the European Union imposed an arms embargo on China.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Van Mierlo, has given the following reply to written questions tabled in the Lower House of the Netherlands Parliament:

'All the Government wishes to say here is that it has tried to ensure that all EU Member States interpret the arms embargo on China uniformly. When this proved impossible - a number of Member States do not interpret the embargo comprehensively - the Netherlands reserved the right to adopt an ad hoc approach with regard to certain military goods, in line with other EU countries'.

What differences of interpretation exist among the EU Member States regarding the European arms embargo on China, and what military goods have certain EU countries therefore exported to China in spite of it?

What proposals has the Commission made to the Council, and when, with a view to securing a uniform interpretation of the arms embargo, and what was the Council's response?

What is the Commission's current approach to this problem?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission (4 September 1997)

The decision concerning the arms embargo against China was taken within the framework of European political cooperation. Implementation falls in the first instance to Member States and to the General Affairs Council. The information at the disposal of the Commission regarding the embargo is confidential, and its disclosure can only be authorised by the Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2274/97 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (2 July 1997)

Subject: Transportation and storage of nuclear warheads and weapons material

In view of growing public concern at the transportation of nuclear warheads and other weapons-related material, is the Commission convinced that such movements do not pose a serious threat to public health, and that they meet the requirements of European law in this area?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2273/97 and E-2274/97 given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (4 September 1997)

Movements of radioactive waste are covered by Council Directive 94/55/EC of 21 November 1994 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States with regard to the transport of dangerous goods by road ((OJ L 319, 12.12.1994. )) and Council Directive 96/49/EC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States with regard to the transport of dangerous goods by rail ((OJ L 235, 17.9.1996. )). These fully incorporate the 1995 International atomic energy agency (IAEA) regulations for the safe transport of radioactive materials. Member States had to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with these directives by 1 January 1997. According to this transport legislation, Member States may exempt the transport of dangerous goods by transport equipment belonging to or under the responsibility of the armed forces.

All practices which involve the risk from ionizing radiation, including the storage and transport of radioactive substances have to comply with the basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public. These were first laid down by Council directive in February 1959 and revised on a number of occasions since that date ((The most recent revision of the basic safety standards is contained in Directive 96/29/Euratom of 13.5.1996. The provisions of this Directive must be in force by 13.5.2000 - OJ L 159, 29.6.1996. )). The provisions of the existing directives require Member States to establish a system of inspections in order to check compliance with these standards.

This Community legislation established under Chapter III 'health and safety' of the Euratom Treaty covers radioactive materials belonging to or under the responsibility of the armed forces, in particular whenever related activities have an impact on population exposure.

On an international level, in September 1997 there will be a formal negotiation of a new joint convention on the safety of spent fuel management and the safety of radioactive waste management. It is expected that this will be open for signature at the IAEA general conference and enter into force as soon as enough states have ratified it. This should help to ensure an adequate level of safety for radioactive waste management practices throughout the world. It is expected that the joint convention will cover the management of spent fuel or radioactive waste from military or defence programmes when such materials are transferred permanently to civilian programmes and managed exclusively within them.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1703/97 by Hadar Cars (ELDR) to the Commission (20 May 1997)

Subject: Representation in Taipei

During his meeting with Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee on 14 April this year, Sir Leon Brittan was reminded of Parliament's call for a representation to be established in Taipei and was asked what action the Commission had taken in response thereto?

He replied that no progress had been made and that the Commission intended to await decisions on Taiwanese and Chinese membership of the WTO.

Given that Hong Kong is soon to be handed over to China, it is important, from a political perspective, that the EU utilize every opportunity to strengthen its contacts with Taiwan. Trade policy alone should not therefore determine when a representation is established in Taipei. It is extremely important, for political reasons, that such an office be opened as soon as possible.

Is the Commission President, Mr Santer, prepared to act in order to ensure that the Commission establishes a representation in Taiwan in the near future?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission (13 June 1997)

The Commission believes that (resources permitting) there is a good case for establishing an office to pursue Community commercial and cooperation policies in Taipei. Such an office could operate on the same informal basis as the commercial and other offices which many countries maintain in Taiwan, including most Member States. It could already perform useful tasks under the current Community market access strategy, and would certainly be even more important once Taiwan is a member of the World trade organisation (WTO). In addition, it would be in a good position to assist in the development of cooperation activities in areas such as science and technology and European studies, as well as in the field of business cooperation. However, such a possibility will depend on an evaluation of the Commission's priorities for the development of its network of external representations. This in turn will depend on the overall availability of human and financial resources.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0773/97 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (10 March 1997)

Subject: Operating appropriations of the European Institutions

With regard to heading B7-302 would the Commission give figures for the total amount of appropriations allocated in 1996 to expenditure on:

- studies

- meetings of experts

- conferences and congresses

- information and publications.

Can the Commission also give figures for these four types of expenditure expressed as a proportion of the total appropriations allocated to the heading in question and state whether it considers this to be a reasonable proportion.

Supplementary joint answer to Written Questions E-0698/97, E-0699/97, E-0700/97, E-0701/97, E-0702/97, E-0703/97, E-0704/97, E-0705/97, E-0706/97, E-0707/97, E-0708/97, E-0709/97, E-0710/97, E-0711/97, E-0712/97, E-0713/97, E-0714/97, E-0715/97, E-0716/97, E-0717/97, E-0718/97, E-0719/97, E-0720/97, E-0721/97, E-0722/97, E-0723/97, E-0724/97, E-0725/97, E-0726/97, E-0727/97, E-0728/97, E-0729/97, E-0730/97, E-0731/97, E-0732/97, E-0733/97, E-0734/97, E-0735/97, E-0736/97, E-0737/97, E-0738/97, E-0739/97, E-0740/97, E-0741/97, E-0742/97, E-0743/97, E-0744/97, E-0745/97, E-0746/97, E-0747/97, E-0748/97, E-0749/97, E-0750/97, E-0751/97, E-0752/97, E-0753/97, E-0754/97, E-0755/97, E-0756/97, E-0757/97, E-0758/97, E-0759/97, E-0760/97, E-0761/97, E-0762/97, E-0763/97, E-0764/97, E-0765/97, E-0766/97, E-0767/97, E-0768/97, E-0769/97, E-0770/97, E-0771/97, E-0772/97, E-0773/97, E-0774/97, E-0775/97, E-0776/97, E-0777/97, E-0778/97, E-0779/97, E-0780/97, E-0781/97, E-0782/97, E-0783/97, E-0784/97, E-0785/97, E-0786/97, E-0787/97, E-0788/97, E-0789/97 and E-0790/97 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (19 September 1997)

Further to its answer of 5 May 1997 ((OJ C 21, 22.1.1998, p. 28. )), 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-0708/97 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (10 March 1997)

Subject: Operating appropriations of the European Institutions

With regard to heading B3-2000 would the Commission give figures for the total amount of appropriations allocated in 1996 to expenditure on:

- studies

- meetings of experts

- conferences and congresses

- information and publications.

Can the Commission also give figures for these four types of expenditure expressed as a proportion of the total appropriations allocated to the heading in question and state whether it considers this to be a reasonable proportion.

Supplementary joint answer to Written Questions E-0698/97, E-0699/97, E-0700/97, E-0701/97, E-0702/97, E-0703/97, E-0704/97, E-0705/97, E-0706/97, E-0707/97, E-0708/97, E-0709/97, E-0710/97, E-0711/97, E-0712/97, E-0713/97, E-0714/97, E-0715/97, E-0716/97, E-0717/97, E-0718/97, E-0719/97, E-0720/97, E-0721/97, E-0722/97, E-0723/97, E-0724/97, E-0725/97, E-0726/97, E-0727/97, E-0728/97, E-0729/97, E-0730/97, E-0731/97, E-0732/97, E-0733/97, E-0734/97, E-0735/97, E-0736/97, E-0737/97, E-0738/97, E-0739/97, E-0740/97, E-0741/97, E-0742/97, E-0743/97, E-0744/97, E-0745/97, E-0746/97, E-0747/97, E-0748/97, E-0749/97, E-0750/97, E-0751/97, E-0752/97, E-0753/97, E-0754/97, E-0755/97, E-0756/97, E-0757/97, E-0758/97, E-0759/97, E-0760/97, E-0761/97, E-0762/97, E-0763/97, E-0764/97, E-0765/97, E-0766/97, E-0767/97, E-0768/97, E-0769/97, E-0770/97, E-0771/97, E-0772/97, E-0773/97, E-0774/97, E-0775/97, E-0776/97, E-0777/97, E-0778/97, E-0779/97, E-0780/97, E-0781/97, E-0782/97, E-0783/97, E-0784/97, E-0785/97, E-0786/97, E-0787/97, E-0788/97, E-0789/97 and E-0790/97 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (19 September 1997)

Further to its answer of 5 May 1997 ((OJ C 21, 22.1.1998, p. 28. )), 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-0714/97 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (10 March 1997)

Subject: Operating appropriations of the European Institutions

With regard to heading B3-300 would the Commission give figures for the total amount of appropriations allocated in 1996 to expenditure on:

- studies

- meetings of experts

- conferences and congresses

- information and publications.

Can the Commission also give figures for these four types of expenditure expressed as a proportion of the total appropriations allocated to the heading in question and state whether it considers this to be a reasonable proportion.

Supplementary joint answer to Written Questions E-0698/97, E-0699/97, E-0700/97, E-0701/97, E-0702/97, E-0703/97, E-0704/97, E-0705/97, E-0706/97, E-0707/97, E-0708/97, E-0709/97, E-0710/97, E-0711/97, E-0712/97, E-0713/97, E-0714/97, E-0715/97, E-0716/97, E-0717/97, E-0718/97, E-0719/97, E-0720/97, E-0721/97, E-0722/97, E-0723/97, E-0724/97, E-0725/97, E-0726/97, E-0727/97, E-0728/97, E-0729/97, E-0730/97, E-0731/97, E-0732/97, E-0733/97, E-0734/97, E-0735/97, E-0736/97, E-0737/97, E-0738/97, E-0739/97, E-0740/97, E-0741/97, E-0742/97, E-0743/97, E-0744/97, E-0745/97, E-0746/97, E-0747/97, E-0748/97, E-0749/97, E-0750/97, E-0751/97, E-0752/97, E-0753/97, E-0754/97, E-0755/97, E-0756/97, E-0757/97, E-0758/97, E-0759/97, E-0760/97, E-0761/97, E-0762/97, E-0763/97, E-0764/97, E-0765/97, E-0766/97, E-0767/97, E-0768/97, E-0769/97, E-0770/97, E-0771/97, E-0772/97, E-0773/97, E-0774/97, E-0775/97, E-0776/97, E-0777/97, E-0778/97, E-0779/97, E-0780/97, E-0781/97, E-0782/97, E-0783/97, E-0784/97, E-0785/97, E-0786/97, E-0787/97, E-0788/97, E-0789/97 and E-0790/97 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (19 September 1997)

Further to its answer of 5 May 1997 ((OJ C 21, 22.1.1998, p. 28. )), 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.