ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2088/96 by Angela Billingham (PSE) to the Commission (26 July 1996)

Subject: Radon gas

Environmentally occurring radon gas is recognised in the United Kingdom as a major cause of cancer. Could the Commission inform me of the current standards in EC countries, regarding the levels of this gas, proximity to dwellings, which are considered acceptable when encountered?

Is the Commission willing to consider legislation in this area to ensure the proper protection of the citizens of the European Union against this threat to health?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (16 September 1996)

The Commission made on 21 February 1990 a Recommendation on the protection of the public against indoor exposure to radon (90/143/EURATOM ((OJ L 80, 27.3.1990. ))). In this Recommendation, a reference level of 400 Bq m-3 radon gas concentration is introduced for consideration of remedial action for existing dwellings, and a design level of 200 Bq m-3 for future constructions.

Member States have responded to this Recommendation in different ways, depending inter alia on the specific features of environmental radon occurrence in each Member State. In general, where reference levels have been introduced, they are coherent with the guidance offered in the Recommendation. The legal status and practical implications of such reference levels being different, it is not meaningful to make a mere numerical comparison.

The Commission actively pursues the follow-up of its Recommendation in Member States. It is, however, the responsibility of national authorities to implement a radon mitigation policy for the protection of the public, in the framework of an overall concern for the public health.

The recently revised Council Directive on the basic safety standards for the health protection of the general public and workers against the dangers of ionizing radiation (96/29 EURATOM ((OJ L 159, 29.6.1996. ))), applies inter alia to natural radiation sources, including radon, mainly as regards occupational exposure but excludes radon in dwellings, which is covered by the above-mentioned Recommendation.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1691/96 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (24 June 1996)

Subject: European Observatory for SMEs

The main part of the Observatory's report concerns developments in the SME Internal Market Monitor, which is designed to assess the effects of completion of the internal market on small and medium-sized enterprises. Completion of the internal market has had an impact on both the performance of SMEs and the environment in which they operate.

In looking at the report, it is clear that:

1. there is still a lack of comparable statistics, which makes analysis difficult; will the Commission therefore make a greater effort to provide a clear and reliable statistical framework as soon as possible?

2. it is vital to have very rapid updates of analyses of business trends and this will be impossible if the report continues to adopt its present broad structure, when it would be more useful to have more specific updates.

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (16 September 1996)

The Commission shares the Honourable Member's views about the importance of having good quality and appropriate statistical information on the number, size, structure and population of enterprises, particularly in order to successfully carry out its own work on devising and assessing policy initiatives in favour of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

In accordance with the provisions of Council Decision 93/379/EEC of 14 June 1993 ((OJ L 161, 2 July 1993. )), the Commission is actively involved in improving both the quality and quantity of statistics on SMEs. In particular, the collection of data which began in 1988 has developed through the involvement of more and more Member States, sectors of activity and variables. A number of statistical projects and programmes have been drawn up, and work on these will continue, with the emphasis being put on improving the scope and relevance of the data and making use of all the information available, rather than burdening enterprises with new requests for data.

In addition, the Commission will endeavour to promote changes in the structure of the annual reports from the European Observatory for SMEs by lightening them with more concise updates, particularly as regards assessing aspects relating to the environment and the performance of enterprises in the internal market. At the same time, efforts will be made to ensure that future reports continue to provide an appropriate basis for discussing horizontal issues concerning SMEs, without, however, calling into question the independent nature of the analyses carried out by the Observatory.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1992/96 by Mary Banotti (PPE) to the Commission (17 July 1996)

Subject: Public relations activities

Following the Commission's supplementary answer to my question E-0561/96 ((OJ C 297, 8.10.1996, p. 8. )), can the Commission tell me why no tenders were listed from the individual DGs or EU agencies, particularly for pan-European work rather than single-country commissions?

What does the Commission class as public relations?

The answer to the previous question includes a great many legal entities having been commissioned for work.

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (30 September 1996)

In its answer to question E-561/96 and the table sent to the Honourable Member and to the Parliament's Secretariat the Commission provided information on the public relations contracts which it entered into in relation to its own activities on information managed by the Directorate general for information, communication, culture and the audiovisual media. The Commission has no specific classification of public relations in its various contracts for external activities.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2097/96 by Eryl McNally (PSE) to the Commission (16 July 1996)

Subject: Financial implications of adding to the official languages of the EU

Can the Commission explain what the financial implications would be of adding to the official languages when new Member States join the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (9 September 1996)

The various imponderables presented by the further enlargement of the European Union, such as the number of applicants and new languages, prevent the Commission from giving the Honourable Member a detailed answer regarding language arrangements at this stage.

Hitherto, every enlargement has been followed by an increase in the number of permanent staff employed by the language services, an increase in the budget for freelance translation and interpreting, an increase in the budget for learning the new languages, additional publication costs and infrastructural adaptation costs (installation of staff and equipment of meeting rooms).

A considerable part of translation and publication costs (a major example being the Official Journal) is attributable to the fact that most Community legislation is directly applicable in the Member States, and must therefore be published in the official languages of all the Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2134/96 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (3 August 1996)

Subject: India - The human rights situation in the Punjab

I have received allegations of human rights abuses, 'disappearances', and the ill-treatment of lawyers and human rights activists in the Punjab, including the case of Sikh human rights activist Jaswant Singh Khalra.

What action is the Community taking to ensure that fundamental human rights are protected in the state of Punjab, and that individual cases of abuse and 'disappearance', such as that of Jaswant Singh Khalra, are thoroughly and independently investigated?

Answer given by Mr Marin on behalf of the Commission (13 September 1996)

The Commission and all the Member States give high importance to the question of human rights, paying particular attention to the issue in cases of contractual links with third countries. In this light, the Commission is following closely developments in the Indian state of Punjab, and will continue to do all in its power in its relation with the Indian authorities to encourage complete transparency and the respect of the rule of law.

Maintenance of the political dialogue between the Community and India is a priority, as stated in the recent 'EU-India enhanced partnership' communication ((COM(96) 275 final. )). The Commission considers that it is in this framework that questions such as that raised by the Honourable Member should be discussed and deepened, as has been done in the past.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2237/96 by Peter Skinner (PSE) to the Commission (9 August 1996)

Subject: Sale of baby squid and immature fish in EU Mediterranean countries

I have received eyewitness reports from one of my constituents concerning the widespread sale of baby squid and immature fish in restaurants and fish markets in the EU countries bordering the Mediterranean.

Can the Commission please comment on these reports? If these reports are true, can the Commission please comment on its position concerning this trade in young fish, etc. which must surely be contrary to any conservation policy that has been put forward by the European Commission on fish stocks?

What does the Commission intend to do to ensure that young fish are not caught and sold in these countries?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (10 October 1996)

From the point of view of the conservation of fish resources, it would be desirable that any commercial catch should consist exclusively of adult fish. In reality, however, and despite the strongest management action, the catch of immature fish in certain proportions is inevitable. This phenomenon is not solely limited to the Mediterranean.

One must, however, take into account that Mediterranean fisheries often exploit local stocks where individual fish never reach such large sizes as their counterparts in Atlantic and Northern waters. This is especially true for squids, of which a large proportion of the catch is mature individuals of the genus Alloteuthis, generally much smaller than those caught in the Atlantic, the majority of which are represented by the genus Loligo. On the other hand, fish from the same species can reach sexual maturity at much smaller sizes in the Mediterranean, and this is the case for hake and other finfish.

Nevertheless, the protection of small sized individuals remains of crucial importance for Mediterranean fisheries. The existence of local markets for small sized fish makes such protection even more necessary.

Up to 1994, no European regulation addressed this issue. However, in 1994 the Council adopted a first set of technical measures for the Mediterranean (Regulation (EC) n° 1626/94) ((OJ L 171, 6.7.1994. )) defining among other factors, minimum landing sizes for a number of species. Due to geographical specificities as described above, these minimum sizes may be smaller than their counterparts in other fisheries. The introduction of this regulation nevertheless offers now the basis for real protection of juvenile fish in the Mediterranean.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2249/96 by Umberto Bossi (ELDR) to the Commission (9 August 1996)

Subject: Disparities in the dates of publication in the various national languages of information and application forms relating to participation in Community programmes

With reference to the brief answer given to Written Question E-1257/96 ((OJ C 305, 15.10.1996, p. 69. )) I should like to ask the following questions.

The Commission publishes calls to tender, invitations to submit applications and expressions of interest concerning Community programmes simultaneously in all the official languages of the EU in the Official Journal. Companies or private individuals, after seeing specific documentation distributed by the various directorates-general, can submit their applications using specific forms also published by the directorates-general.

All this material is only very rarely available in all the national languages, but is available in English, French and German. Sometimes it is available in the other languages only weeks later.

How does the Commission justify choosing these particular languages? Does the Commission not consider that this selection criterion effectively penalizes individuals and firms in the Member States whose official languages are not those mentioned above? Does the Commission not consider this choice to be a tacit endorsement of unfair competition within the Union?

Since the deadline for submitting applications and requests is the same for all (as laid down in the Official Journal) but, in practice, creates differences between countries based on the choice of language, can the Commission say how it intends to remedy the disparity in the amount of time available to those interested in submitting applications for access to Community programmes?

If, as is often claimed, delay in publishing material in all the official languages are due to 'mere' translation problems, does the Commission not consider that these technical shortcomings in effect undermine the principles of transparency and equality, which form the ideological basis of the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (23 October 1996)

While in certain cases documents may become available first in the languages used for their drafting or preparation within the Commission, the Commission intends to avoid the problems to which the Honourable Member refers by ensuring to the maximum of its ability that published documents directly relating to competitions, calls for proposals and manifestations of interest should be published simultaneously in all the Community languages.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1191/96 by James Nicholson (PPE) to the Commission (15 May 1996)

Subject: Population control programmes in developing countries

Will the Commission list:

1. All projects dealing with population control which are receiving European Community funding.

2. The name of each recipient organization, the amount of funding provided with the purpose for which the funding is intended, together with the country in which that funding is being used.

3. A list of all non-governmental organizations which receive EU funding for population control programmes.

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

A list of population control projects funded by the Commission is sent direct to the Honourable Member and the Parliament's Secretariat. The list covers the projects currently financed under various budget lines and financial protocols.

Since the focus on a reproductive and sexual health approach was incorporated in the programme of action of the International conference for population and development in Cairo ((Published by United Nations Department of Public Information DPI/1618/POP-95-93124-March1995-30M. )) in September 1994, existing population programmes can no longer be defined as 'population control programmes', focusing on birth control only. These programmes move beyond this focus and include all information and services which enable women and men to have sexual relations without fear of infection, unwanted pregnancy, coercion or violence. They are thus enabled to control their fertility in the manner of their choosing without unpleasant or dangerous side effects and to enhance their ability to bear and raise healthy children.

A list of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) receiving funding is also sent direct to the Honourable Member and the Parliament's Secretariat. NGOs which have received direct funding in the past are included as well. As far as the NGO cofinancing scheme (B7-6000, ex-B7-5010) is concerned, most family planning projects (in addition to smaller such components in wider integrated projects) have been cofinanced with two NGOs, Marie Stopes international and Population concern, in a huge number of developing countries, for a global amount of more than 5 MECU in 1993-1995. In view of the bulky character of the information on those numerous projects, the documentation on these, including list of projects, name of beneficiary organisations, amounts and beneficiary countries, is sent direct to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat General of the Parliament.

In the ACP countries a number of health programmes focusing on primary health care supported by the Community do include family planning as an element of the minimum package of services which have to be secured at the primary level. The total amount for health projects under the 7th European development fund represents 310 MECU. In addition to this amount, some 500 MECU of the counterpart funds from the structural adjustment facility are targeted to support national health projects.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2471/96 by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) and Peter Pex (PPE) to the Commission (23 September 1996)

Subject: Commercial espionage using the Commission's computers

Can the Commission confirm the report in the Telegraaf of 6 August 1996 that the American intelligence services have hacked into computers owned by the Commission (and Parliament) to obtain confidential commercial information?

Can the Commission confirm that last year, during the talks on a new world free trade agreement, the American negotiators were privy to highly confidential information belonging to the Commission?

Has the Commission received information from other countries (e.g. the ACP countries) on the USA obtaining and using confidential commercial information?

What can the Commission do to prevent this, both within its own services and in the civil services of the developing countries belonging to the ACP?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (23 October 1996)

The Commission possesses no evidence, apart from press claims, on any of these allegations.

The Commission has made stringent efforts over recent years to improve the security of its computer networks and these efforts continue. It cannot answer for internal measures of African, Caribbean and Pacific countries.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1465/96 by Abdelkader Mohamed Ali (GUE/NGL) to the Council (31 May 1996)

Subject: Setting up of a monitoring unit for racism and xenophobia

On Saturday, 4 May 1996, Mohammed Khouas was shot by two skinheads in Sens, France. Regrettably, gratuitously violent nature of such racist acts such as this are increasingly common in the European Union.

The European Parliament was consulted recently on the proposal for a Council decision to declare 1997 European Year against Racism and pronounced itself in favour of the entire idea, in particular the setting up of a monitoring unit on racism and xenophobia, as it was convinced that such a unit would help combat more effectively this threat to peaceful co-existence in our society.

However, does the Council consider the annual report and other publications of the monitoring unit to constitute an adequate instrument for combating racism and xenophobia more effectively?

How and to what extent can the findings of the unit influence the policies of local authorities, national governments and the Union itself?

Reply (29 October 1996)

1. At the request of the European Council, the Consultative Commission on Racism and Xenophobia drew up a report including over one hundred recommendations for measures to be taken within the European Union together with a feasibility study on a European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia. The report was presented to the European Council in Cannes on 26 and 27 June 1995; the study was submitted to the European Council at its meeting in Florence on 21 and 22 June 1996. The European Council reaffirmed the Union's determination to combat racism and xenophobia with the utmost resolve; it approved the principle underlying the establishment of a European Monitoring Centre. It asked the Council to examine the legal and budgetary conditions of the future Monitoring Centre as well as the links between the latter and the Council of Europe and to mandate the Consultative Commission on Racism and Xenophobia to continue its work until the Monitoring Centre was set up.

2. In its study the Consultative Commission made proposals concerning a draft statute for a future centre: the Centre's main purpose should be to exercise vigilance in the face of the manifestations of racism and xenophobia, including anti-semitism, within the Union, to analyze the dangers which the resurgence of these phenomena pose for the Union and to provide the Union's Institutions and the Member States with objective and reliable date, comparable at European level, together with recommendations, so that the necessary policies to combat them can be drawn up and implemented. Thus, the Centre will be an institution that stimulates the involvement of civil-society organizations and acts in cooperation with the Community Institutions, the Member States of the Union, non-governmental organizations, other international bodies and persons with responsibilities in the field of combating racism and xenophobia.

3. As stated above, the proposals of the Consultative Commission are now examined by the Council.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2518/96 by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission (25 September 1996)

Subject: The dumping of cheap footwear on the European market

Can the Commission confirm that it will take the strongest possible action against footwear manufacturers found to be guilty of dumping cheap exports on the European market as a result of its current investigations?

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

Two proceedings concerning footwear are currently being dealt with by the Commission. One concerns footwear with leather and plastic uppers originating in the People's Republic of China, Indonesia and Thailand, while the other concerns footwear with textile uppers originating in the People's Republic of China and Indonesia.

Although no decision has yet been taken, the Commission can confirm in respect of both of these proceedings, that if injurious dumping is found, and if the Community interest so requires, remedial measures provided in the Community's anti-dumping legislation will be put in place.