ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1276/96 by Gary Titley (PSE) to the Commission (24 May 1996)

Subject: Labelling of ingredients in cosmetics

The Commission will be aware that Directive 93/35/EEC ((OJ L 151, 23.6.1993, p. 32 )) made it a requirement for all ingredients in cosmetics to be listed on the packaging. Would the Commission now indicate what progress Member States have made in implementing this legislation?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (4 July 1996)

The state of transposal in the Member States of Council Directive 93/35/EEC of 14 June 1993 amending for the sixth time Directive 76/768/EEC on the approximation of the legislation of the Member States relating to cosmetic products is currently as follows:

1. Belgium: No communication

2. Denmark: Transposed into domestic law by 'Bekendtgørelse om Kosmetiske Produkter' of 9 July 1993.

3. Germany: No communication

4. Greece: No communication

5. Spain: No communication

6. France: No communication

7. Ireland: No communication

8. Italy: No communication

9. Luxembourg: Transposed into domestic law by Reglement grand-ducal of 30 July 1994. Pursuant to Articles 5 and 6 of this regulation, problems concerning the inventory of ingredients used in cosmetic products will be resolved at national level via ministerial orders to be taken in application of the Community measures referred to in points 4, 7 and 10 of Article 1 of Directive 93/35/EEC.

10. Netherlands: Transposed into domestic law by the 'Warenwetbesluit kosmetische produkten' of 11 October 1995.

11. Austria: No communication

12. Portugal: No communication

13. Finland: No communication

14. Sweden: Transposed into domestic law by 'Läkemedelsverkets föreskrifter om kontroll ar kosmetiska och hygieniska produkter', adopted on 7 November 1995.

15. United Kingdom: No communication

It should be noted that the inventory of ingredients employed in cosmetic products and the common nomenclature were adopted by Commission Decision 96/335/EEC of 8 May 1996 ((OJ L 132, 1.6.1996. ))
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0886/96 by Odile Leperre-Verrier (ARE) to the Commission (17 April 1996)

Subject: Plan to set up a 'second chance' school in Marseille

Can the Commission say what stage has been reached in the plan to set up a 'second chance' school in Marseille?

Can it also specify on what legal basis the project may be carried out and how it will be financed, and can it provide some additional information regarding:

- the form the teaching will take

- the way the establishment will be run?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (14 June 1996)

The 'second-chance schools' are one of the approaches proposed by the White Paper 'Teaching and learning - towards the learning society' ((COM(95) 590 final )) to combat social exclusion. While the debates triggered by the White Paper are likely to continue, the Commission envisages supporting, on an experimental basis and in consonance with the principle of subsidiarity, a number of pilot projects which may provide the kind of information needed to gauge the potential of the proposed approaches. The creation of a 'second-chance school', wherever the competent authorities propose projects to this end, could be one of these pilot projects. Currently the regional and municipal authorities in Marseilles are considering creating an institution with this vocation. This project will be launched at the initiative of the regional and local authorities.

The 'second-chance schools' will mainly have to be financed at local, regional and national level, depending on the powers of the authorities concerned. They may also benefit from supplementary finance under the structural funds (European Social Fund, Objective 3, provided they respect the strategy adopted and the eligibility criteria, notably as regards the target groups and financial participation. Besides they may benefit from Community initiatives under Article 11 of the Regulation coordinating the structural funds (Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88, as amended ((OJ L 193, 31.7.1993 ))). Moreover, certain transnational activities between establishments involved in combatting social exclusion could be supported in the framework of the Leonardo and Socrates programmes.

The way these establishments are managed, as well as the curriculum and the teaching methods adopted, are a matter for the competent authorities in the Member States. Most of them grant a certain independence to the teaching teams so as to ensure maximum responsiveness to the needs of their young clientele. These teaching teams use methods adapted to pupils with difficulties, such as computer-assisted learning, which allows them to work at their own pace.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1042/96 by José Valverde López (PPE) to the Commission (3 May 1996)

Subject: Failure of the Spanish Government to comply with the Directive on the use by workers of personal protective equipment

How does the Commission view the Spanish Government's failure, in the context of employment, labour relations and social affairs, to comply with Directive 89/656/EEC ((OJ L 393, 30.12.1989, p.18 )) on the use by workers of personal protective equipment?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1041/96, E-1042/96, E-1043/96 and E-1044/96 given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (12 June 1996)

The Honourable Member should consult the Commission's Thirteenth Annual Report to the Parliament on monitoring the application of Community law - 1995 ((COM(96) 600 )), and notably the annex 'State of application of the directives', which will shortly be transmitted to Parliament.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1093/96 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (13 May 1996)

Subject: Funding of water supply projects

The Commission is said to be reconsidering financing water supply projects from the Cohesion Fund in the districts of Ptolemais, Khalkida, Yiannitsa, Veroia, Trikkala, Florina, Argos and Tripolis, although a decision had previously been taken to provide EU funding for budgets of less than ECU 10 million for each of these projects.

1. Does the Commission intend to go back on the original decision and suspend the funding of these projects?

2. If so, what are the grounds in each case for doing so and, in particular, what is the justification in the case of the Khalkida project?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1093/96 and E-1106/96 given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (14 June 1996)

In accordance with Article 9 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 792/93 of 30 March 1993 establishing a cohesion financial instrument, ((OJ L 79, 1.4.1993. )) in October 1993 the Commission approved technically and financially discrete stages of water supply projects in the districts of Halkida, Ptolemaïs, Yiannitsa, Veroia, Trikkala, Florina, Argos and Tripolis. The works in question were completed in October 1995.

Subsequently, in July 1994 and November 1995, the Greek authorities submitted other technically and financially independent stages of water supply projects in the those same districts, under Article 1(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1164/94 of 16 May 1994 establishing a Cohesion Fund. ((OJ L 130, 25.5.1994. )) Those projects, costing between ECU 1.4 million (for Halkida) and ECU 3 million (for Ptolemaïs), were not adopted, and in December 1995 the Commission informed the Greek authorities of its decision not to part-finance them.

The Cohesion Fund has not received an application from the Greek authorities for these projects as a group of related projects pursuant to Article 10(3) of the Cohesion Fund Regulation. If such an application were presented, the Commission could reconsider the cases in question.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1041/96 by José Valverde López (PPE) to the Commission (3 May 1996)

Subject: Failure of the Spanish Government to comply with the Directive on safety and health requirements for work with display screen equipment

How does the Commission view the Spanish Government's failure in the context of employment, labour relations and social affairs, to comply with Directive 90/270/EEC ((OJ L 270, 21.6.1990, p.14 )) on minimum safety and health requirements for work with display screen equipment?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1041/96, E-1042/96, E-1043/96 and E-1044/96 given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (12 June 1996)

The Honourable Member should consult the Commission's Thirteenth Annual Report to the Parliament on monitoring the application of Community law - 1995 ((COM(96) 600 )), and notably the annex 'State of application of the directives', which will shortly be transmitted to Parliament.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1153/96 by André Sainjon (ARE) to the Commission (15 May 1996)

Subject: OECD agreement on shipbuilding

The collapse of the German shipbuilder, Bremer Vulkan, has led the German authorities to recapitalize the group's three shipyards in Mecklenburg-West Pomerania to the tune of at least DM 1 billion and they may have to do the same for the Bremen and Bremerhaven sites.

In the wake of the Belgian and Danish bankruptcies, does the Commission not take the view that state aid for shipbuilding is essential and that, consequently, the OECD agreement will never be implemented in full? Should it not take note of this and reformulate a European policy worthy of the name by making jobs its top priority?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (10 June 1996)

First of all, the Commission would like to clarify that it has not yet been informed by the German authorities about their intentions as regards further assistance for the shipyards in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern which belonged to the Bremer Vulkan group, or in favour of the Bremer Vulkan shipyards in the Land of Bremen.

The Commission is aware of the difficult situation of many shipbuilding companies in the Community. However, in the view of the Commission the bankruptcies and financial difficulties of shipyards in Germany, Belgium and Denmark to which the Honourable Member refers were not caused by the Organization for economic cooperation and development (OECD) shipbuilding agreement.

The Commission is convinced that this agreement, reached after five years of intensive negotiations between the main players in the world shipbuilding markets, is well balanced and fully satisfactory to the Community. It will not only set common rules on all sorts of state aids but also, responding to the concerns of the European shipbuilding industry, introduce antidumping rules for the first time in this sector. This will allow the Community to take action against injurious pricing, which is of particular importance in view of the persisting overcapacities.

Employment and social considerations ranked high in the negotiation of the agrement, and therefore it is also in the interest of securing long term employment in the European shipbuilding industry that the OECD shipbuilding agreement should enter into force as scheduled.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0668/96 by Peter Crampton (PSE) to the Commission (15 March 1996)

Subject: Third country fisheries agreements

At present the European Union is in the process of negotiating and/or re-negotiating a number of fishing agreements with third countries.

What is the current status of the negotiations with each country concerned?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (20 May 1996)

The Commission has concluded fourteen fisheries agreements with African, Caribbean and Pacific countries. The technical and financial aspects of the fishing arrangements for which they provide are set out in protocols and annexes to the agreements. These are regularly renewed before expiry, so that a new protocol follows on from an old one without hiatus and there is no interruption in fishing activities. Seven protocols fall to be renewed in 1996 (those with Seychelles, Angola, São Tomé and Príncipe, Gambia, Mauritania, Senegal and Mauritius). In the case of Mauritius the government denounced the framework agreement in January and a new agreement will therefore have to be negotiated before the protocol and technical annex can be renewed. Protocols due to expire in subsequent years will similarly be renewed in due course.

On the basis of a negotiating mandate, given by the Fisheries Council on 20 December 1995, the Commission is currently re-negotiating the fisheries agreements with the coastal states of the Baltic Sea. The basic aim is to amalgamate the agreements concluded by Finland, Sweden and the Community (as constituted before enlargement) into one new agreement between the enlarged Community and each of the Baltic coastal states (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and the Russian federation). These new agreements may also include so-called 'second generation' elements, providing for the possibility to stimulate the creation of joint ventures and joint enterprises between private operators of both parties with financial assistance from the Community. It is expected that negotiations with Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland will be successfully concluded before summer. The negotiations with the Russian federation are somewhat delayed because of Russian internal procedures to recognise Community competence for the management of fisheries agreements concluded by Finland and Sweden before accession.

New second generation agreements are planned with a number of Latin American countries. Negotiations with Venezuela are already under way and exploratory talks are being held with Peru and Mexico. Likewise, following a preliminary exploratory discussion, further talks will take place with New Zealand to look at the possibility of concluding a fisheries agreement.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1260/96 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (24 May 1996)

Subject: Prices of consumer goods

At present the indication of the selling price of goods is governed by two directives, 79/581/EEC ((OJ L 158, 26.6.1979, p.19 )) for foodstuffs and 88/314/EEC ((OJ L 142, 9.6.1988, p.19 )) for non-food products. These directives laid down the general obligation to indicate the unit price for goods pre-packaged in specified quantities, with temporary derogations for certain ranges of products. The transitional period, which would have expired on 6 June 1995, was recently extended by two years by virtue of a Commission proposal (Directive 95/58/EC ((OJ L 299, 12.12.1995, p.11 ))).

Can the Commission find appropriate means to ensure that the period of two years laid down for compliance with the new directive started on the date of publication and not on 7 June 1995?

Furthermore, steps should be taken to oblige the Member States to incorporate the directive into national legislation within six months of its publication.

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (20 June 1996)

The Honourable Member takes over the concerns expressed in Parliament's amendment no 21 adopted on 18 April 1996 ((OJ C 141, 13.5.1996. )) concerning the Commission proposal on consumer protection in the indication of the prices of products offered to consumers ((OJ C 260, 5.10.1995 )). As invited by the Parliament, the Commission is preparing an amended proposal which will be transmitted soon to the Parliament.

The Commission believes that six months following the publication is not adequate time for the Member States to implement the directive into national law.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0744/96 by Josu Imaz San Miguel (PPE) to the Commission (26 March 1996)

Subject: Discards by the pelagic trawler fleet

The recent statements in the newspaper Sud-Ouest (February 1996) by the French scientist Mrs Anne Collet, director of the scientific institute for the study of marine mammals at La Rochelle, have spread alarm concerning the extent of discards by the pelagic trawler fleet in the Bay of Biscay. These statements suggest that the use of the techniques in question is leading to a high mortality rate among mammals.

Is the Commission aware of Mrs Collet's statements?

Is the Commission making efforts to investigate and summarize the effects of fisheries discards, in particular those arising from pelagic trawling in the Bay of Biscay?

If so, is the Commission in possession of quantitative data concerning the level of discards by this fleet? Could it inform Members of the consequences of these discards, assuming that it does have the data?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (7 May 1996)

The Commission is aware of these declarations to the press. The Commission is also aware of the results of several studies on the effects of some fishing gear on marine mammals, and has taken a number of initiatives (both scientific and regulatory) to promote studies on these effects and, in some particular cases where the scientific evidence was available, to ban certain fishing practices.

In this context, the Commission prepared a report on the evaluation of biological impact of fisheries and, subsequently, a communication to the Council on the same subject ((COM (95) 40 final )) which notes that the scientific evidence on the impact of fisheries on marine mammals is still very weak and which therefore undertakes to support quantitative investigations in this field. The fisheries committee of the Parliament discussed this matter in detail and put forward a report ((Report Langenhagen - A4-0006/96 )) adopted in the plenary session of 16 February 1996 ((OJ C 65, 4.3.1996. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0948/96 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (26 April 1996)

Subject: Employment policy

The reduction in Community prices and the sharp cut in output which the Union's farmers have been obliged to make on account of CAP reform and the GATT Uruguay Round agreements have had serious consequences for employment in the agricultural sector and rural areas in the Union.

Job losses, which are affecting not only salaried farm workers, but also self-employed producers, will make themselves felt above all in sectors which have hitherto received generous support. There will also be repercussions in sectors up- and downstream of agriculture.

Agricultural employment therefore needs to be promoted.

1. Will the Commission recognize the occupational status of female farm labour by amending Directive 86/613/EEC, which recommends that Member States accord specific rights to the wives of self-employed workers? ((OJ L 359, 19.12.1986, p. 56. ))

2. Will it help set up social services such as care facilities for children and the elderly, transport, health, and replacement services, and job creation and business consultancy centres so as to enable women to devote themselves to new tasks?

3. Will it take steps to encourage Member States to incorporate provisions in their laws on employment protection and assistance in connection with technical safety and occupational medicine on farms?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (14 June 1996)

In the framework of the fourth medium-term Community action programme on equal opportunities for men and women (1996 to 2000) ((Council Decision 95/593/EC of 22.12.1995 - OJ L 335, 30.12.1995 )), improvement of the status of women in family farms in rural areas is recognised as a challenge for the future.

In this respect Council Directive 86/133/EEC of 11 December 1986 ((OJ L 359, 19.12.1986. )) on the application of the principle of equal treatment between men and women engaged in an activity, including agriculture, in a self-employed capacity, does not seem to have had the impact that was originally anticipated, because of the modesty of the obligations it imposes. However the Commission will continue to study the progress made in implementing the Directive and will propose actions designed to promote its objectives. Moreover, having evaluated the situation in detail and fully consulted all the parties concerned, the Commission will propose a Directive amending Directive 86/613/EEC and designed to respond to real needs in this area, including recognition of the occupational status of women farmers and the establishment of assistance and relief services, as well as information structures.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1000/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (26 April 1996)

Subject: Compliance with ILO conventions by the countries of Latin America

What discussions has and will the Commission have with governments from Latin American countries concerning compliance with key ILO Conventions against child and slave labour, for freedom of association and non-discrimination, and for the rights of indigenous peoples?

Will the Commission make signature to and compliance with these conventions conditional to the agreement of any future bilateral agreements between the EU and these countries, either individually or en bloc?

Will the Commission also seek to press the World Trade Organization to ensure compliance with these conventions in a future 'social clause' at international level?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (10 June 1996)

Since 1992, all the agreements the Community has concluded with third countries have stipulated that observance of democratic principles and human rights constitutes a key element of the agreements.

A clause of this kind is included in the cooperation agreements with the Latin American countries and enables the Community, where necessary, to take restrictive measures proportional to the seriousness of the case. This could involve termination of the agreement or suspension of its application in whole or in part.

More specifically, and in an effort to give concrete support to respect for the provisions mentioned by the Honourable Member in all Latin American countries, the Commission is backing projects for the underprivileged such as children and indigenous people and schemes designed to strengthen respect for the freedom of association and the rights of indigenous people.

As for social clauses included as incentives in trade relations, it should be stressed that the new Generalized Scheme of Preferences (GSP) provides, from 1 January 1998, for additional preferences for recipient countries which apply more advanced social policies and notably respect the content of the ILO Convention No 138 on the minimum age of employment. The aim of this objective is to offset the extra cost entailed by gearing the recipient countries' development policies to the needs of social progress.

The GSP also includes a provision under which the preferential arrangements may be withdrawn at any time, in whole or in part, in the event of unacceptable practices on the part of the recipient countries. These include slave labour as defined in the Geneva Conventions of 25 September 1926 and 7 September 1956 and in ILO Conventions No 29 and No 105.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0853/96 by Leen van der Waal (EDN) to the Commission (12 April 1996)

Subject: Enforced closure of religious radio station in Romania

According to reports in Nederlands Dagblad and information from the Netherlands religious organization 'Dorkas Hulp aan Vervolgden' (aid for victims of persecution), the Romanian state-run National Council for Authorized Broadcasters has decided to withdraw broadcasting rights from two radio stations belonging to the religious broadcasting organization 'Voice of the Gospel' in Bucharest and Cluj-Napoca. The radio stations in Timisoara and Suceava are also threatened with closure. This is happening despite the fact that in 1989 the National Council for Authorized Broadcasters took the decision to grant broadcasting rights for five years to the Evangelical Alliance of Romania, which unites various religious groups.

1. Can the Commission confirm these reports?

2. Does the Commission share my view that these actions conflict with the internationally recognized rights, also incorporated into Romania's Media Law and Basic Law, to freedom of worship and freedom of expression?

3. Does the Commission also take the view that the above actions are at odds with the Europe-Agreement concluded with Romania?

4. What action does the Commission intend to take?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (10 June 1996)

The Commission understands that this is a technical problem related to finding frequencies with enough emission power and not related to freedom of expression. The Romanian authorities have offered a new frequency to 'Voice of the gospel'.