ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4205/97 by Gerardo Fernández-Albor (PPE) to the Commission (21 January 1998)

Subject: Courses on the European Union on school syllabuses

The European Union is a reality encompassing all facets of the lives of Community citizens, since they live in a de facto and de jure community with all the other citizens of the Member States.

For this reason it is essential that Community citizens should be able to identify, from their schooldays onwards, with all that the European Union represents in their personal, professional and political lives.

Can the Commission therefore say what it knows about the school syllabus in the Member States in which European Union studies are compulsory and what steps it is taking to ensure that ultimately all the fifteen Member States agree to include it as a compulsory subject on the school syllabus?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (24 February 1998)

While recognising the importance of Community-oriented education for the development of European citizenship, the Commission wishes to draw the attention of the Honourable Member to Article 126 of the EC Treaty, under which the Community is required to 'contribute to the development of quality education by encouraging cooperation between Member States and, if necessary, by supporting and supplementing their action, while fully respecting the responsibility of the Member States for the content of teaching and the organisation of education systems and their cultural and linguistic diversity'.

Nevertheless, with due regard for the Member States' exclusive responsibility, the Commission supports and finances various activities in connection with the implementation of Comenius, Chapter II of the Socrates programme, thereby fostering the inclusion of Community-related subjects in school education. Moreover, a thematic network on European citizenship is due to be set up some time this year. The main purpose of this network, bringing together education establishments and other institutions working in the field, will be to compile relevant information in respect of European citizenship, to organise the dissemination of good practice as regards the teaching of Community-related subjects, and to pave the way for the development of projects on these subjects, giving them greater prominence in education systems.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3847/97 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (5 December 1997)

Subject: Designation of 'the cultural capital of Europe'

In replying on behalf of the Commission to Written Question E-3127/96 ((OJ C 105, 3.4.1997, p. 54. )) Mr Oreja made it clear that no application for funding had yet been made by the Greek authorities for the 'Thessaloniki - 1997 cultural capital of Europe' event. Given that one year has since elapsed and the event is now drawing to a close, can the Commission say whether it did finally provide funding for 'Thessaloniki - 1997 cultural capital of Europe' and if so, how much?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (6 February 1998)

The Commission made the following financial contributions to the European City of Culture event in 1997.

1. A contribution of ECU 403 012 under Action IV of the Kaleidoscope Programme (Item B2-2001) to support the five activities below:

- Soprano Vasso Papantaniou (and the Hungarian State Orchestra 11/11/1997) ECU 24 089

- The Hungarian State Orchestra 11-12/11/1997 ECU 47 289

- Ionio University Choir 22/11/1997 ECU 18 991

- The Opera 'Konstantinos Palaiologos' 26-28/11/1997 ECU 296 390

- Paul Mercier's 'Kitchensink' 1-2/12/1997 ECU 16 253

2. A contribution of ECU 208 556 under Item B3-2003 (Other cultural measures in the Community and in cooperation with third countries) for the organisation of the exhibition 'Treasures from the Monasteries of Mont Athos.'

The Community contribution for 1997 therefore totals ECU 611 568.

As is the case every year, the Commission made a contribution of ECU 344 890 to the organisation of the Aristeion Prizes (The European Literary Prize and The European Translation Prize). This is part of the European City of Culture event.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3967/97 by Reimer Böge (PPE) to the Commission (12 December 1997)

Subject: Need for a general directive on animal feedstuffs

Does the Commission agree that given the large number of directives currently in existence there is a need for a general feedstuffs directive to create a clearly defined and manageable framework for EU legislation in this field?

If so, what key objectives and principles does the Commission feel should be covered as a matter of priority?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (3 February 1998)

The Commission agrees with the Honourable Member that, because of their large number, the directives governing feedingstuffs should be recast into a single directive as soon as convenient.

Work did start with this aim in view but it has had to be suspended, unfortunately, because of other more pressing problems.

The Commission agrees that the current legislation should be recast mainly with a view to simplification but without abandoning the objectives that saw its introduction in the first place, i.e. protection of animal and human health, environmental protection, maintaining feed quality and providing information for livestock rearers. Simplification should result in the adoption of rules that, because they are transparent, can be better applied by the various operators and by the feedingstuffs industry in particular.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3811/97 by Hilde Hawlicek (PSE) to the Commission (26 November 1997)

Subject: Customs discrimination against camcorders with input sockets

European amateur film and video makers are placed at a disadvantage in their creative activities. For customs purposes in the EU camcorders equipped with input sockets are treated like normal video recorders. In order to avoid these customs disadvantages,the manufacturers omit important connections from the equipment. As a result amateur video makers do not have the possibility of using the newest processing technologies. It is anyway unlikely that an amateur video maker would contemplate recording programmes with a camcorder.

As camcorders are not produced anywhere in the EU, and fully equipped machines can therefore not be purchased. and as there is thus a danger of increased illegal imports of such machines, the Commission is asked:

Why are camcorders with input sockets treated for customs purposes like normal video recorders?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (30 January 1998)

Before 1 January 1996 video-camcorders were classified in CN code 8521 10 31 of the combined nomenclature (based on the nomenclature as set out in the annex to the international convention on the harmonized commodity description and coding system (HS)), a heading which covers video recording and reproducing apparatus. Thus, video-camcorders which always have plugs for the recording of television programmes were classified as video recorders and received the tariff treatment accorded to such products (14%) in conformity with the Community's common customs tariff.

When the HS nomenclature was modernized on 1 January 1996 the text of heading 8525 was expanded to cover 'still image video cameras and other video camera recorders'. This amendment regrouped the different types of apparatus, including those capable of recording programmes from a television receiver - the camcorders. It was acknowledged that this amendment for certain contracting parties, including the Community, entailed the transfer of camcorders from heading 8521 to heading 8525. Thus, it can be confirmed that camcorders are classifiable in CN code 8525 40 99.

When a product is transferred from one heading to another, the commitment by the Community to provide the tariff treatment follows the heading. Consequently camcorders continue to be subject to the 14% duty rate. Unilateral duty rate reductions for consumer electronic products, including video-camcorders, are not envisaged. Indeed such products were explicitly excluded from the information technology (IT) agreement whereby a number of countries, including the United States, Japan and the Community, agreed to eliminate the tariffs on IT products.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3496/97 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (10 November 1997)

Subject: Health and safety of workers at the sugar factory in Larissa

According to complaints from the Works' Council and a report published by the doctor responsible for health at work, health and safety conditions at the sugar factory in Larissa are unacceptable, in particular workers are exposed to chemical agents (hydrochloric acid, sulphur, formalin), sugar dust that crystallizes in the lungs and noise.

In the light of Directive 89/391/EEC ((OJ L 183, 29.6.1989, p. 1. )) on encouraging the improvement of the health and safety of workers at the workplace, will the Commission say whether it is aware of the complaints about working conditions at the factory concerned and what measures it will take to enforce health and safety rules there?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (20 January 1998)

The Commission is unaware of the complaints about the working conditions in the specific sugar factory mentioned by the Honourable Member and intends to contact the Greek authorities for further information. Employers have a legal obligation to implement the measures included in national laws, regulations and administrative provisions which transpose the Community's legislation on health and safety of workers at work.

Specifically in addition to Council Directive 89/391/EEC on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work ((OJ L 183, 29.6.1989. )), the corpus of legislation includes a series of specific measures of particular relevance, for example, Council Directive 80/1107/EEC on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to chemical physical and biological agents at work ((OJ L 327, 3.12.1980. )) as amended by Council Directive 88/642/EEC ((OJ L 356, 24.12.1988. )), as well as Council Directive 86/188/EEC on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to noise at work ((OJ L 137, 24.5.1986. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4087/97 by Katerina Daskalaki (UPE) to the Commission (16 January 1998)

Subject: Hydroelectric plant on an archeological site

Authorization has recently been given for the construction of two hydroelectric plants in the vicinity of Dimitsana, close to an area designated by the Ministry of Culture as an archeological site situated around the legendary Lousios Gortynias river, where the monasteries of Ioannou Prodromou (John the Baptist), Filosofou and the Aimialon are situated, together with ancient Gortyna. Authorization will also be given to run pipes along the river embankments. In addition, an open-air museum of hydraulics was recently opened in the same locality with cofunding from the European Union.

Will the Commission take measures to protect this area of exceptional natural beauty which is also the site of many European cultural treasures?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (4 March 1998)

As the Honourable Member is aware, the protection of national archaelogical heritage falls exclusively within the competence and responsibility of the Member States. The Community's and the Commission's role in particular is that foreseen within the terms of subsidiarity and its intervention is clearly defined in Article 128 of the EC Treaty. Specifically, its role is to encourage cooperation among Member States in the field of cultural heritage conservation. That cooperation can be made concrete through plans co-decided by the Parliament and the Council, such as the Raphael programme.

In this context, it is evident that the Commission cannot intervene in the matter raised by the Honourable Member, namely the construction of the hydroelectric plant in the vicinity of Dimitsana.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4207/97 by Gerardo Fernández-Albor (PPE) to the Commission (21 January 1998)

Subject: Blue paper on fishing in the European Union

Various events affecting fisheries in the European Union have led to a new situation throughout the sector which makes it necessary to rethink and redirect Community fisheries as a whole.

Various groups involved in fishing activity in the Member States consider it appropriate to reassess the past, consider the present situation and draw up the relevant forecasts for the future.

Does the Commission therefore consider that it should draw up a 'blue paper' on the fisheries situation throughout the Community, containing ideas and forecasts which will strengthen the sector without it having to fear the vicissitudes and upsets which have an adverse effect on such a fragile economic sector?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (13 February 1998)

As already announced on several occasions, both to Parliament and to other bodies, the Commission intends to start a wide-ranging consultation exercise on the common fisheries policy (CFP) after 2002 with all interested parties, including the entire fisheries sector.

The Commission will do this by means of a questionnaire and meetings in Member States during 1998 and 1999.

After the exercise the Commission will draw up a report to Parliament and to the Council on the fisheries situation in the Community in accordance with Article 14(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 3760/92 establishing a Community system for fisheries and aquaculture ((OJ L 389, 31.12.1992. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3688/97 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Commission (19 November 1997)

Subject: The Helms-Burton law

Is the Commission fully aware that after its negotiations with the US Administration on the application of the Helms-Burton law, the US legislative has hardened its position still further against the European Union's interests?

In view of this attitude, what measures has the Commission adopted or does it intend to adopt?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3686/97, E-3687/97, E-3688/97, E-3689/97 and E-3690/97 given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission (19 December 1997)

The understanding with the United States is not unbalanced. The Commission has brought a World trade organisation(WTO) panel procedure against the Helms-Burton Act. The Commission considers that this legislation is in violation of international law since it intends to influence (or has the effect of influencing) the behaviour of Community companies because of their involvement in Cuba. The understanding of 11 April 1997 reached between the Community and the US on the Helms-Burton Act and the D'Amato Act, by which the Community agreed to suspend its WTO case regarding the former, calls for the development of disciplines which 'should inhibit and deter the future acquisition of investments from any State which has expropriated or nationalised such investments'. In addition, and in parallel, the understanding also calls for the Community and the US to work together to address and resolve through agreed principles the issue of conflicting jurisdictions and secondary boycotts. It is important to note that the discussions between the Community and the US on this point are in symmetry with the discussions on investment disciplines. These talks are currently taking place with a view to finding an acceptable deal which will trigger a waiver under title IV of the Helms-Burton Act, thereby neutralising the extraterritorial effects of this Act.

In addition, the Community made clear that no settlement of the differences over the Helms-Burton Act will be implemented unless the United States has also granted Community companies a waiver under the D'Amato Act.

The Community has reserved all rights to resume the WTO panel procedure, or begin new procedures, if measures are taken against Community companies under Helms Burton or D'Amato as a result of waivers not being granted or continued.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3785/97 by Christof TANNERT to the Commission. Community aid to the Land of Berlin in 1996



Official Journal C 174 , 08/06/1998 P. 0129



WRITTEN QUESTION E-3785/97 by Christof Tannert (PSE) to the Commission (26 November 1997) Subject: Community aid to the Land of Berlin in 1996 What amounts of Community aid were approved and drawn for the Land of Berlin in 1996, for what measures and under what programmes 1. in the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)? 2. in the European Social Fund (ESF)? 3. in Community research programmes? 4. in Community programmes in the energy sector? 5. in Community programmes in the environmental sector? 6. in other of the Community's programmes? Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (14 January 1998) 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-3812/97 by Hilde Hawlicek (PSE) to the Commission (28 November 1997)

Subject: Cultural activities as a percentage of the EU budget

As in various publications concerning cultural policy there are often differing percentages given for cultural activities in the EU budget and as these figures are often passed on from one publication to another, can the Commission indicate:

1. What is the actual percentage for cultural activities in the EU budget for 1997?

2. How has this proportion changed over the years since there have been cultural initiatives in the Commission?

3. What areas or budget headings does the Commission include when calculating the percentage for cultural activities?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (5 February 1998)

In 1997 a total of ECU 27 925 000 was earmarked for cultural measures, accounting for 0.03% of the total Community budget of ECU 89 137 million.

In recent years the proportion of the Community budget allocated to culture has been as follows:

>TABLE>

It is hoped that the Framework Programme on Culture 2000-2006, to be laid before Parliament and the Council in May 1998, might bring about an increase in the amounts earmarked for culture.

In calculating the proportion of the budget reserved for culture, the Commission includes Chapter B3-20, which consists of the following items:

B3-2000: Raphael programme B3-2001: Kaleidoscope programme B3-2002: Ariane programme B3-2003: Other cultural measures.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3552/97 by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission (12 November 1997)

Subject: Funding under Regulation 1318/93/EEC in Italy and sales of Colorado meat

Further to my previous questions E-4101/96 ((OJ C 217, 17.7.1997, p. 62. )) and E-0970/97 ((OJ C 45, 10.2.1998, p. 11. )) on the subject of EU funding for advertisements to promote the consumption of beef and veal in Italy, which have been condemned by the Italian self-regulatory authority for advertising standards, a member of the AEEP/EASA (European advertising standards association), I wish to point out that the Rome edition of the 'Corriere della Sera' newspaper of 21 October 1997 contained a page of advertising from the 'GF Commercio Carni' company, a signatory to the aforementioned notices together with the 'Consorzio Italiano Macellatori', which refers to the EEC mark obtained and their compliance with the 'Pregiata Qualità Bovina' certified quality standard. It also states that 'in a constant bid to improve quality, we have included among our most prestigious products Colorado 'American beef''.

Does the Commission consider it acceptable to extend funding to companies which, in the same advertisement, pride themselves in having obtained the EEC mark and in selling non-European - indeed American - meat?

What is the total amount granted by the Commission to 'GF Commercio Carni' and 'Consorzio Italiano Macellatori'?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (10 December 1997)

The page of advertising to which the Honourable Member refers does not form part of any promotion campaign funded by the Community.

It is purely commercial advertising by a company which sells both high-quality meat which meets the Community criteria and meat of other origins.

The Commission is sending the decision on the Community's financial contribution to 1997 programmes to promote high-quality beef to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat direct.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3992/97 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Council (15 January 1998)

Subject: Racist violence in Germany

According to data from the Federal Anti-Crime Agency, assaults by neo-Nazis have risen by 14% since last year, bringing the total to 5 173, the victims being Portuguese, Italians, Turks, Greeks and other workers.

One victim of such violence was the Greek immigrant, Anastassios Dalakouras, who was seriously injured following an assault by right-wing extremists on 8 November 1997 in a village in Brandenburg.

Controlling such acts and manifestations of racism is the responsibility of the EU because the protection of human rights and the fundamental freedom of movement of individuals are involved. Will the Council, therefore, say how many people have been arrested in connection with the above incidents and what charges have been brought against them? What measures does the German Government intend taking to clamp down on racist violence on its territory?

Answer (30 March 1998)

1. The Council condemns all acts motivated by racism or xenophobia. The Council has no statistics concerning the incidents mentioned by the Honourable Member of the European Parliament.

2. In this context the Council recalls the Joint Action of 15 July 1996 concerning action to combat racism and xenophobia ((OJ L 185, 24.7.1996, p. 5. )). As provided for in this Joint Action, the Council will assess the fulfilment by Member States of their obligations under this Joint Action, taking into account the declarations annexed to it, by the end of June 1998. It is not for the Council to reply with regard to preventive measures to be taken by the governments of each Member State.

3. Finally, the Council points to the existence of the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia, which was set up under Council Regulation No 1035/97 of 2 June 1997. The Centre's Management Board held its first meeting in Vienna on 21 January 1998. The main purpose of the Centre's work will be to provide the European Union and its Member States with objective, reliable and comparable information on racist, xenophobic and antisemitic activities within Europe. This information will be very useful in preparing the measures to be taken by the Member States or the Union within their respective spheres of competence.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3779/97 by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission (21 November 1997)

Subject: Regional derogation from national hunting law and its incompatibility with Community rules

On 5 November 1997 the Lazio Regional Executive in Italy adopted a decree derogating from the national law on hunting, thereby making it permissible to hunt protected species such as the Italian sparrow and starlings.

Does this regional legislation conform to the European Directives on conservation of wild and hunted species, in particular Directive 92/43/EEC ((OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p. 5. ))?

If the answer is no, does not the Commission believe that it should institute infringement proceedings?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (7 January 1998)

An infringement procedure is already under way against Italy concerning in particular the transposition of the derogation provided by Article 9 of the Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds ((OJ L 103, 25.4.1979. )).

Since the Commission aims to ensure an effective compliance with Community law of the internal laws of Member States at every level, this infringement procedure involves also the aspect of the competence of regions in implementing Community law in Italy and their obligation to comply with it. The Commission would be grateful if the Honourable Member would transmit the text approved by the Giunta Regionale del Lazio to which the question makes reference. In any case the Commission will request information on the subject matter from the Italian authorities.