ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2085/96 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission (26 July 1996)

Subject: Free movement

The commitment to free movement for citizens of the Member States of the Union was, I presume, intended also to cover blind people.

What action does the Commission propose to take against the UK government by refusing to let blind people take blind dogs to the UK when travelling? This in effect is a restriction on free movement.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (3 October 1996)

Of course the commitment to free movement of citizens within the European Union applies to blind people. The restriction of movement in this case is not to the blind person per se but rather to the accompanying guide dog which is currently subject to British rabies quarantine regulations.

A number of initiatives have already been taken including Community funding of a rabies eradication scheme, which is progressing satisfactorily and an alternative system to quarantine has been agreed for entry of traded dogs and cats into the United Kingdom. The Commission is committed to making suitable proposals for accompanied dogs and cats at an appropriate time.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2289/96 by Peter Truscott (PSE) to the Commission (30 July 1996)

Subject: Insulin research and BIOMED funding

Can the Commission please give details of research that it is aware of into the use of human insulin as opposed to animal insulin in the treatment of insulin-dependent diabetics? Would the Commission agree that this is a priority area for future research, possibly using BIOMED funding?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (24 September 1996)

The Commission agrees that diabetes mellitus is indeed a priority area for funding, within its Biomedecine and health research programme among others. The current Biomed-2 programme already supports within its area 4.4 nine research projects on various aspects of diabetes research (details are forwarded direct to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat General of the Parliament).

None of these specifically address the topic of treatment with human or animal insulin, but there is another opportunity to apply for funding in this field during the third call of the Biomed-2 programme, which closes on 17 December 1996. Full details are set out in the scientific work programme for Biomed-2, available to all interested applicants.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2380/96 by James Provan (PPE) to the Commission (6 September 1996)

Subject: Brucellosis in Italy

What steps is the Commission taking to control the outbreak of brucellosis among water buffalo in the Naples region of Italy?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (25 September 1996)

A national brucellosis eradication programme (test, compulsory removal of infected animals, compensation, disinfection and movement control) is currently being applied by the Italian veterinary services to all water buffalo herds in Italy.

The number of infected holdings in 1995 was twenty eight. In the first half of 1996 thirty six holdings were identified as infected. These figures are well within the expected range. The Commission is examining the possibility of giving Community financial aid to this programme.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2161/96 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (2 August 1996)

Subject: Checks on withdrawals of fruit and vegetables in France

The Court of Auditors' 1994 Annual Report states that its inspections revealed that in France, there had been no on-site inspections with regard to the free distribution of fruit and vegetables withdrawn from the market, as checks before aid was paid out were based on presentation of a certificate from the recipient organization. Similarly, there were no official, systematic checks to ensure that the produce certified as received was used by the recipient and did not form part of their normal purchases.

In view of the Commission's reply to the Court of Auditors, that its inspectors would carry out a detailed investigation into this matter, what have been the results of these inspections, what measures have been taken by the Commission to rectify the situation and what were the financial implications?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on be half of the Commission (9 September 1996)

The Commission is not in possession of evidence to prove that free distribution operations in this Member State were carried out in a way which did not comply with Community rules.

Furthermore, the Commission would point out that the Court of auditors has not suggested that the alleged weaknesses should result in financial corrections being applied.

This matter will however be examined during the next on-the-spot inspection in this Member State and any financial consequences which prove justified will be drawn in the clearance of the accounts of the 1994 year.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2311/96 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (27 August 1996)

Subject: Name of parts of the euro

Regarding the launch of the euro, the future single currency, the Union's Monetary Committee decided at its meeting in Brussels on 9 April 1996 that the coins to be issued would be denominated in multiples - 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, and so forth - of a smaller monetary unit called a... cent.

The word 'cent' plainly means nothing to French-speaking countries. Indeed, the natural French pronunciation could lead to confusion with other French words such as 'sans' ('without').

What is more, the system appears to have been copied from the division of the dollar, hardly an appropriate model for the single European currency.

Could the Commission say whether division of the euro into 'cents' is irrevocable official policy?

If so, who took the decision?

Would it not be desirable to find a name on which, like the euro itself, all the Member States could agree?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (26 September 1996)

The issue of what to call the hundredth part of the euro was discussed by the Economics and Finance Ministers at their Verona meeting on 13 April. Their choice was the word 'cent'.

Those initial discussions were designed to prepare the way for the decision that will be taken by the Heads of State or Government. The name of the subdivision of the euro will be decided when the European Council adopts at the end of the year the Regulation laying down the legal status of the euro as from 1 January 1999.

As with the name for the single currency, the decision will have be in favour of a name that is short, simple and easy to pronounce in all the languages of the European Union.

Although opting for the word 'cent', the Ministers took the view that this did not rule out continued national usage in everyday language. Thus, French speakers could call the subdivision of the ecu the 'centime'.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2375/96 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (27 August 1996)

Subject: 1997 Preliminary draft budget

In the light of the breakdown of appropriations in line B7-702 (human rights and democracy in the developing countries) can the Commission say when and how it decides to take action (selection of projects, beneficiaries, resources made available by the EU and/or third parties, etc.)?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (8 October 1996)

Since the entry into force of the Treaty on European Union, the Community's development cooperation policy has been closely tied to the consolidation of democracy and the rule of law and to the observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

The Community's approach in this area is a positive one, aimed at promoting such values and supporting any measure to nurture and consolidate democracy and the rule of law. Consequently, the Community can take negative measures in the event of serious human rights violations or an interruption of the democratic process.

The Community has created a number of financial instruments to implement this policy: special budget headings, funds for financial cooperation with third countries, the European Development Fund (EDF) and counterpart funds. It is through integrated use of these instruments and through political dialogue with its partners that the Community feels it can best implement this policy.

When selecting measures to finance, the Commission now takes account of the development strategy of each country and examines the projects in that light; it also takes account of thematic priorities (elections, support for the judicial system, human rights observers). The Commission tries to concentrate its resources in priority countries or countries at risk, such as Mozambique, Rwanda, Haiti and Burundi in 1995 and 1996. In such cases, the Commission conducts fact-finding missions to analyse the situation in the country and identify on the ground needs in terms of human rights and democracy. The aim of these missions is to propose schemes to be funded and identify those bodies best able to carry them out.

The various projects examined or identified are analysed to determine their quality, their conformity with the budget heading's financing criteria and with the thematic priorities, their cost-effectiveness, the experience of the applicant body in the relevant field, the political expediency of carrying out the measures and the order of priority according to the needs of the recipient country. If the evaluation is positive, the Commission takes the final decision. Once the scheme has been adopted by the Commission, a contract is drawn up and the financial commitment is made.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2474/96 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (23 September 1996)

Subject: Drug smuggling

Ahead of Sweden's membership of the EU, Swedes were apprehensive that our previously strict border controls would be done away with. In particular, it was feared that there would be an increase in drug smuggling. The Swedish police are now saying that they have noticed an increase in the supply of drugs from eastern Europe, particularly Poland.

It is a serious matter if the Community's customs authorities have failed to prevent drug trafficking. What measures is the Commission taking to reduce the influx of drugs from Poland and elsewhere and is the Commission satisfied that the external border controls are effective?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (22 October 1996)

Combating unlawful drug-trafficking is a matter which falls within the third pillar of the Treaty on European Union and is the responsibility of the Member States' enforcement services. Therefore, although it is understood that there has been a recent increase in the smuggling of drugs through the external frontier of the Community from Eastern Europe, the Commission has no actual statistical evidence to support the statements made by the Swedish police.

For its own part and within the limits of its competence, the Commission is active in assisting the customs services of the Member States in controlling the external frontier, in any way that it can. In particular, it administers the Matthaeus programme, which provides training for Community customs officials through seminars, exchanges of officials and the development of common training programmes. It has also agreed to manage the customs information system under the terms of the 1995 Convention on the use of information technology for customs purposes ((OJ C 316, 27.11.1995. )), once that Convention comes into force. With regard to mutual assistance between customs administrations, the Commission is in the process of revising Community legislation and parallel work is in progress in the Council on an updating of the 1967 Naples Convention. All these measures are designed to help strengthen controls at the external frontier.

With regard to Poland, in particular, there has been assistance under the Phare programme including technical assistance to draft adequate legislation on drugs issues and the supply of detection equipment. There is also an association agreement between the Communities and their Member States on the one part and Poland on the other ((OJ L 348, 31.12.1993. )) which inter alia, in the main Articles and in Protocol No 6 (which is supported by a joint declaration (No 15)), includes measures on co-operation in customs and drugs matters in the field of policies and measures to counter the supply and illicit traffic of drugs.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2208/96 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (9 August 1996)

Subject: Special US taxes on imported Italian pasta

The US International Trade Commission has imposed duties ranging from 2.8% to 46.6% on two thirds of the Italian pasta imported into the United States.

In 1995, Italian exports to the United States covered between 10% and 15% of the latter country's pasta requirements, i.e. 161 000 tonnes worth $147 m in all, making Italy the biggest foreign supplier to the US.

US pasta consumption is growing by 5% a year.

The American decision amounts in practice to a protectionist measure that benefits US multinationals and adversely affects the Italian industry.

What political, economic, and legal steps will the Commission take forthwith in order to safeguard Italian and Community interests?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission (9 October 1996)

In July 1996, in the context of parallel anti-dumping and countervailing investigations, the United States trade authorities decided that imports of pasta from Italy had been dumped and subsidized and had caused material injury to American industry. Anti-dumping and countervailing duties were consequently imposed.

As the Commission monitors all anti-dumping and countervailing investigations initiated by third countries against exports of products from the Member States, it followed the pasta investigations very closely. With regard to the countervailing investigation in particular, the Commission was actively involved in conjunction with Italy in replying to questionnaires from the United States authorities and in arguing against the imposition of measures in several consultation meetings held in accordance with the provisions of the World trade organisation (WTO) subsidies agreement. Some of these arguments have been accepted, and this has resulted in the imposition of lower duties than could have been the case otherwise. With regard to the anti-dumping investigation, the Commission's main role is to examine the third country's procedures in the light of the relevant multilateral agreements within the context of the WTO. In fact, the existence or not of dumping is an issue which concerns the behaviour and pricing policies of each Community exporter individually, and the Commission would not therefore normally be involved in assessing the situation of such individual producers except in the context of a breach of the WTO rules.

The Commission is currently assessing the United States decisions to impose measures on Italian pasta. While the imposition of duties as a result of anti-dumping or anti-subsidy actions is, in itself, legitimate, this has to be done in accordance with international rules, laid down in the WTO agreements. If the Commission considers that the above agreements have not been respected it will act to remedy any violation in consultation with Member States on possible actions. In the meantime, the Commission intends to have further consultations with the United States government to clarify certain aspects of these measures.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1986/96 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (17 July 1996)

Subject: BSE - CJD

Are Member States being encouraged to increase the number of post-mortem examinations of patients who have died from non-specific neurological disorders, with a view to improving screening for the so-called new strain CJD?

If the number of new strain CJD cases throughout Europe increases - in countries where BSE has not been reported, how does that affect the possible link between BSE and CJD?

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

It is up to each Member State to decide whether to increase the number of post-mortem examinations generally and, in particular, in respect of persons who have died from degenerative neurological disorders.

There are 11 officially recorded cases of a variant of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) in the United Kingdom and one case in France. The possibility of a link between bovine spongiform encephalopathy and CJD is still being investigated in various ways (epidemiological studies). Understanding of the true nature of any such link will be enhanced in the event of other cases of this variant being confirmed in other countries.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2587/96 by Riccardo Garosci (UPE) to the Commission (11 October 1996)

Subject: Equal treatment in terms of contracts and pay for officials and local staff employed in Commission offices

Local staff employed at Commission offices in the Member States complain that, from the legal and economic point of view, they are not treated in the same way as Commission officials, even though they perform the same tasks and have the same qualifications.

Local staff do the same work for the same time and under the same arrangements as officials. That notwithstanding, salary levels, treatment for social security purposes, and terms of contract are subject to two different systems of rules (one example being the rules governing the Joint Sickness Insurance Scheme, which covers officials only).

Such distinctions enable the Commission to cut costs but manifestly violate the principle of equal treatment within the Community's institutional machinery.

Bearing in mind that standard contracts for local staff are in the process of being revised, does not the Commission believe that such staff at least need to be paid the same emoluments and salary as officials performing the same tasks, so as to avert the kind of discrimination referred to above?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (20 November 1996)

The Honourable Member refers to the presence in the representation offices of local staff and officials carrying out somewhat similar tasks.

The rules governing local staff working conditions have evolved with the development of the principles set out in Articles 79 et seq. of Regulation (ECSC, EEC, Euratom) No 2615/76 ((OJ L 299, 29.10.1976. )) and subsequent amendments to the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Communities.

On the basis of these rules, a specific set of rules has been made for each Member State, laying down conditions of employment in proper conformity with national law and with the general aim of being among the best employers.

Category C and D staff employed in representation offices whose working conditions are governed by the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities will on departure be replaced by local staff in accordance with the Commission decision of 26 April 1989. ((SEC(89) 662. ))

A working party is currently looking into the question of a new set of general framework rules to harmonize certain terms of employment for all local staff employed in representation offices in the Community. The framework rules would be supplemented by the special terms applicable in the place of employment to take account of local conditions. It would also make it possible to set up a career structure reflecting the tasks carried out by local staff in accordance with the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Communities. The staff representatives are fully involved.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3099/96 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (18 November 1996)

Subject: Pensioners Parliament

Will the Commission support the proposal for a Seniors' Parliament in 1998 which would be five years after the first one in 1993 and be in advance of the International Year of Older People in 1999?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (4 December 1996)

The Commission warmly welcomed the senior citizens' parliament which took place in 1993, and will be pleased to lend whatever support it can to a further event of this type in 1998 if arranged by the Parliament.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2753/96 by Francisca Sauquillo Pérez del Arco (PSE) to the Commission (21 October 1996)

Subject: Funding of projects to promote health

According to some sources, funding was granted to only around 10% of the projects submitted to DG V/F following its last call for applications for subsidies to promote health measures.

Can the Commission provide a list of the projects funded in 1996?

Can it give a breakdown of the subsidised projects, by nationality of the applicant organisations?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (4 December 1996)

The projects submitted to the consultative committee 'promotion health' amount to a global figure of 6.35 MECU. The priorities defined by this committee in the annual work programme have been taken into account.

The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and to the Parliament's secretariat the list of projects funded in 1996, together with a breakdown by Member State of the projects. It should be noted, that more than 50% of the funds are allocated for projects covering all Member States (EUR 15).

In addition, 1.5 MECU from the budget line B3-4300 has been allocated to public health analysis, policy and programme coordination, development and evaluation.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2081/96 by Jean-Louis Bourlanges (PPE) to the Commission (26 July 1996)

Subject: Competition policy: award of contract for roadworks

A number of environmental protection organizations and several communes in the Paris region have lodged complaints with the Commission about the French State's decision to award the company Cofiroute a construction contract in connection with the building of a 15 kilometre link road designed to complete the A86 bypass in west Paris. The contract appears to have been awarded under conditions which infringe Community law and breach the most basic rules of competition.

The principle whereby, under French law, a wrongly sited structure cannot be demolished, suggests that if the procedures initiated by the organizations and communes do not come to a swift conclusion, the complainants will be unable to win their case and they will suffer a real denial of justice.

What steps has the Commission taken or will it take to ensure that the procedures are completed before progress on the project renders the complaints entirely pointless in practice?

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

The Commission has received several complaints in connection with the Decree of 21 April 1994 approving a seventh supplementary clause to the agreement reached on 26 March 1970 between the French State and the company Cofiroute awarding the concession for the A28, A85, A86 and A126 motorway sections. The first complaint, concerning the A85, formed part of Petition No 722/94, which was examined by Parliament's competent committee. In response to this complaint, a letter of formal notice was sent to the French authorities in November 1995. The Commission received a further complaint concerning the A85 in February 1996. It is this second complaint that is referred to by the Honourable Member. In April a letter was sent to the representative of the aforementioned bodies indicating that the two complaints had been joined together and were being examined as part of the same infringement procedure.

The dispute is fundamentally concerned with (i) the value of the commitments entered into by the French authorities prior to the date of entry into force of Directive 89/440/EEC, ((OJ L 210, 21.7.1989. )) as amended by Directive 93/37/EEC, ((OJ L 199, 9.8.1993. )) with the motorway concession holders regarding the above-mentioned sections, and (ii) the assessment as to whether the corresponding rules on competitive tendering were complied with. The French authorities have replied to the Commission's letter of formal notice and have supplemented their July reply with numerous documents now being examined by the Commission.

The Commission will be sure to inform the Honourable Member and Parliament's Committee on Petitions of the action taken in this matter.