ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3778/98

by María Sornosa Martínez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Measures to accompany the International Year of the Oceans

The United Nations has declared 1998 the International Year of the Oceans, thereby providing the Commission with a suitable context in which to update its policies in this sphere and take forceful action as regards both legislation and the promotion of initiatives to improve the current precarious plight of the oceans.

Pollution prevention policies require updating to give greater prominence to the protection of rivers for the benefit of inland seas such as the Mediterranean. (The Commission is reminded of serious situations highlighted recently, such as the state of the river Segura and its estuary on Spain's eastern seaboard.) Likewise, the need to maintain biodiversity demands a global policy which does not neglect the maritime environment, especially in the case of seas whose very nature gives rise to humid conditions dependent on the activities undertaken in coastal areas. The seas and oceans find themselves under attack from activities ranging from transport and the dumping of nuclear waste into the sea to insensitive building policy in coastal areas. Fishing methods, as well as the need to ensure compliance with existing directives and to draw up new directives which do not cause a conflict of interests between the various Member States, have an important role to play in the conservation of fishery resources. Bans should be imposed on practices such as the use of seiners to catch bluefin tuna in the Mediterranean, which has been greatly detrimental to fishing operations off the Valencian coast.

1. Does the Commission intend to undertake a comprehensive examination of its general water policy at this juncture, taking account of all the factors which affect it directly and indirectly?

2. What steps does it envisage taking in the legislative sphere of water policy?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(5 February 1999)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-3181/98 by Mrs Sierra González(1).

(1) See page 47.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2085/98

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(10 July 1998)

Subject: Statistics on Greece

Under the title of "Weekly Europe Selected Statistics No 1055", "Europe" of 18 May 1998 republished from Eurostat Statistics in Focus, Economy and Finance 12/98 data on public and private investment in the Member States of the EU. The figures, however, do not include data on Greece.

1. Why does data on Greece not appear?

2. If the lack of data is due to their not being provided by the Member State, what measures is the Commission taking to address the problem so that it is possible to produce statistics for all the Member States of the EU?

Answer by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(15 September 1998)

The publication to which "Europe" referred on 18 May 1998 was issue No 1998/12 of the series entitled "Statistics in Focus - Economy and Finance", which dealt with government and private sector investment in the European Union 1980-96. The issue provided an abridged version of some of the data appearing in the publication entitled "National Accounts ESA: Detailed Tables by Sector - Non-Financial Transactions."

The publication at European level of reliable and comparable data on gross fixed capital formation broken down by sector of investment depends on the availability of a consistent and exhaustive set of detailed statistical information. Until now, the Member States have always transmitted data on the non-financial transactions of the institutional sectors, especially general government bodies, on a voluntary basis. In the absence of particular data for Greece, it was not possible to include this Member State in the issue of "Statistics in Focus" to which the Honourable Member referred.

There should be a significant improvement in the situation in the coming years, after the application from 1 January 1999 of Council Regulation (EC) 2223/96 of 25 June 1996 on the European system of national and regional accounts in the Community(1), which requires the Member States to provide each year a set of sectoral data from the national accounts.

(1) OJ L 310, 31.11.1996.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4075/98

by Werner Langen (PPE) to the Commission

(14 January 1999)

Subject: EU aid to Rheinland-Pfalz from 1994-98

Will the Commission state the amounts of aid from the EU budget to Rheinland-Pfalz in the period between 1994 and 1998, its recipients and the number of jobs created thereby, and in what areas?

In particular, what funds were paid out under the programmes in the following fields:

- KONVER,

- agriculture,

- EAGGF,

- education,

- youth,

- culture,

- research and technology,

- higher education,

- industry,

- regional development/Structural Funds and

- the social sector?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(25 February 1999)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3003/98

by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Application for State aid by the firm of Anker

An application for support from the firm of Anker (industrial bakers) is currently being considered by the Social Affairs Ministry in Vienna. The financial assistance requested is in the region of 90 million schillings, to be used for restructuring the firm and maintaining its economic viability. This will not be the first time that this operation has been restructured with the help of State funds.

According to press reports, the Austrian Social Affairs Ministry has already agreed to grant the aid.

This assistance will go to alleviate burdens which should in fact be borne by the firm of Anker itself. The money is to be used not only for restructuring and safeguarding jobs, but also for purposes of expansion.

In my view, further support would represent a distortion of competition to the detriment of many small and medium-sized businesses in the baking and confectionery industry in Austria.

1. Is the Commission aware of this situation?

2. What is the Commission's view of this financial assistance from the State?

3. What will the Commission do if the situation is deemed to violate the rules of competition?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(12 November 1998)

A complainant already informed the Commission that the Austrian firm Anker applied for a state aid to the ministry of social affairs. The Commission will ask the Austrian authorities for their comments and will also investigate whether the company received any state aid in the past, and if so, whether the aid was provided in accordance with an approved or existing scheme.

In general, rescue or restructuring aid to a large undertaking would require an individual notification to the Commission. If any Member State grants state aid to an undertaking before the Commission has made its position known, the Commission would without any delay initiate the procedure provided in Article 93 (2) of the EC Treaty. If the Commission considers that such a state aid is not compatible with the common market having regard to Article 92, the Commission would declare the aid illegal and the Member State would have to recover the state aid.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3823/98

by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Dispute-settlement proceedings against India

Can the Commission say how many dispute-settlement proceedings have been opened against India within the WTO since November 1997 and list the subjects of those proceedings, and can it say how many of the proceedings under way have been opened and suspended without arriving at an amicable settlement?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission

(15 January 1999)

The Community has initiated four disputes settlement cases against India since November 1997. They are all at the World trade organization (WTO) consultation stage.

Measures affecting export of certain commodities, raw hides and skins (doc. WT/DS120). The de facto export ban on hides and skins by India led the Community to request WTO consultations on 16 March 1998. Two rounds of WTO consultations were held but no amicable settlement to the dispute has yet resulted. The Commission continues to follow this issue closely. At a meeting held in Delhi on 18 November 1998 the Commission made it clear to the Indian side that in the absence of a quick positive move, the Community would consider requesting a WTO panel.

Measures affecting the automotive sector (doc. WTO/DS146). WTO consultations were requested on 6 October 1998 and held with the Indian side on 2 December 1998 in Geneva. At issue is the Indian restrictive import regime for car components and unassembled vehicles which compels a manufacturer to use domestically produced goods and to export automotive products for a certain value. The Commission is reviewing the replies from the Indians and has requested additional information from Delhi.

Import restrictions (doc. WT/DS149). WTO consultations were requested on 29 October 1998 and took place on 3 December 1998. The Community considers that India has adopted a series of import restrictions that may not be justified by General agreement on tariffs and trade (GATT) Articles XX and XXI which allow members to maintain import restrictions to protect human, animal or plant life or health, national treasures, exhaustible natural resources, or essential security interests. The Commission is reviewing the replies from the Indian authorities in these talks.

Measures affecting customs duties (doc. WT/DS150). WTO consultations were requested on 30 October 1998 and took place on 2 December 1998. According to Community calculations, the increase of certain duties has resulted in a breach of the WTO bound rates for more than 100 tariff lines.The Commission is assessing the replies from the Indian authorities.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3752/98

by Nelly Maes (ARE) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Provocative statements in the Turkish media

Can the Commission answer a number of questions in the wake of recent disturbances in Sint-Joost-ten-Node (Belgium)?

These disturbances followed a statement by the Italian Prime Minister, Massimo d'Alema, that he would not extradite to Turkey the Kurdish PKK leader, Abdullah Öcalan, who had been detained shortly before, and that he would even give consideration to Öcalan's request for asylum - which resulted in a boycott of Italian products in Turkey.

The some day the Turkish state television indirectly called on the Turkish community in Europe to take action. One consequence of this was the serious disturbances in Sint-Joost-ten-Node: two Kurdish homes were set alight and there was destruction of property. Eyewitnesses said that the disturbances were obviously well organised, with the involvement of the Turkish extreme right-wing Grey Wolves.

What is the Commission's attitude towards this provocation in the Turkish media? Is it prepared to draw any conclusions concerning relations between the European Union and Turkey, the customs union between the two parties and Turkey's application for membership of the EU?

Answer given by Mr van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(11 January 1999)

The Commission is very aware of the recent demonstrations to which the Honourable Member refers and the incidents that arose from them. Belgian prosecutors have launched an investigation to determine who was responsible and what caused the incidents. That investigation is still proceeding. The Commission will await the results before considering its response.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3414/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(17 November 1998)

Subject: Heart transplants

Does the Commission have data concerning the incidence of heart transplants in each of the Member States?

Does it agree that it is necessary, in view of the importance of and increasingly frequent recourse to this procedure, to conduct a survey on the basis of which to draw up rules and initiatives that are the same for everyone?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2487/98

by Undine-Uta Bloch von Blottnitz (V) to the Commission

(30 July 1998)

Subject: European subsidies for bullfighting

The construction of a large new bullring has recently been approved in San Sebastian, in the Basque region of Spain. The project is to be financed partly by regional public funds. The rearing of fighting bulls is supported by European Union funds.

1. What is the Commission's view concerning the building of a new bullring, particularly in view of the fact that the protection of animals has now acquired Treaty status through the Amsterdam Treaty, and should thus be taken into account in all the policies of the Community and its Member States?

2. Are EU funds earmarked for the construction of the new bullring? If so, on what scale and payable to whom? Can the Commission ensure that public funds made available for the project do not (via Structural Fund payments to Spain) come from the EU budget, even though they have perhaps not been applied for directly for the project?

3. In what way and on what annual scale does the European Union support the breeding and rearing of fighting bulls in Spain?

4. What is the relationship between such expenditure and the obligation enshrined in the Treaty to spare animals unnecessary suffering?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(9 October 1998)

1. The Commission is very vigilant where animal welfare is concerned and looks very carefully therefore at any Community contribution towards facilities where animals might be ill-treated or used as part of a show.

2. The bullring at San Sebastian did not receive a contribution from the Structural Funds.

3. The common agricultural policy provides no specific grant for the rearing of fighting bulls. A premium scheme for male bovine animals has been in place since 1987 but adult bulls were excluded from it in 1996 as a result of a change in the Community rules (Regulation (EC) 2222/96)(1) (the exception being a limited number of animals produced by extensive rearing methods which can temporarily qualify under the scheme in 1997 and 1998). The Commission has no information on the amount of aid that might go towards fighting bulls. The premium is granted when the animal is 10 months old, before its use for bullfighting has been decided.

4. In the light of the above, this question is without foundation.

(1) OJ L 296, 21.11.1996.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3527/98

by Anna Karamanou (PSE) to the Council

(13 November 1998)

Subject: Decision by the Turkish administration to dismiss the supervisory committee of the Patriarchal Theological School of Chalki

The Turkish administration recently took the arbitrary decision to dismiss the supervisory committee of the Patriarchal Theological School of Chalki. At the same time the Directorate-General for Public Welfare Foundations in Turkey wishes to oblige the Oecumenical Patriarchate and the Synod to obtain the "permission" of the supervisory committee before undertaking even the most insignificant action in the monastery. These decisions prove that equality before the law, justice and religious freedom which are guaranteed by the Turkish Constitution exist only on paper.

Will the Council say how it intends to intervene to safeguard democratic freedoms and religious rights in Turkey, in view of the critical discussions concerning the Commission report on progress in relations between the EU and Turkey?

Reply

(8 February 1999)

1. The Council regrets the situation of human rights in Turkey, including freedom of expression in religious matters, and is well aware that under the Treaty of Lausanne signed in July 1923, the Turkish Government has undertaken to grant full protection to churches, synagogues, cemeteries, and other religious establishments of non-Moslem minorities.

The Council is concerned about the developments related to the Halki Patriarchal School of Theology. The Austrian Federal President raised the issue personally during the official visit to Vienna by the President of Turkey, Mr Demirel, on 17-19 November 1998.

2. In line with the European Parliament's request made to the Council in the context of the Parliament's assent to implement the final phase of the customs union, the Council monitors human rights and democratic developments in Turkey. The European Council, meeting in Luxembourg on 12-13 December 1997 recalled the Council position expressed at the Association Council with Turkey on 29 April 1997, that strengthening Turkey's links with the EU also depended on Turkey's alignment of human rights standards and practices with those in force in the EU as well as respect for and protection of minorities.

3. The respect of human rights is particularly important for countries which have applied for EU membership. In this context, the Commission's report of 4 November 1998 on Turkey's progress towards EU accession, based on Article 28 of the Association Agreement, acknowledged the Turkish Government's public commitment to combat human rights violations, but noted that this had not yet had any significant effect in practice.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2848/98

by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Mushroom growing

In view of the constant expansion of mushroom growing in various regions of Italy and the substantial economic activity it generates, not least in terms of employment, can the Commission say whether any aid or economic incentives are available for this sector and, if so, what they consist of?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(22 October 1998)

The Commission has been closely attentive to the expansion of Community mushroom production.

Article 1(2) of Council Regulation (EC) 2200/96 of 28 October 1996 on the common organisation of the market in fruit and vegetables(1) lists the products covered by the market organisation. These include mushrooms.

No specific aid is granted at Community level for mushroom cultivation but since the market organisation for fruit and vegetables was reformed, on entry into force of the abovementioned Regulation, the Commission has been granting financial assistance to producer organisations to set up operational funds and implement operational programmes. Mushroom growers can benefit from this assistance in exactly the same way as growers of the other products covered by the market organisation.

(1) OJ L 297, 21.11.1996.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3892/98

by Luciano Vecchi (PSE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Age limits for participating in the European Voluntary Service (EVS) programme for young people

When they adopted the legislative text on the EVS programme for young people after a lengthy and complicated codecision procedure, the European Parliament and the Council defined the age limit for participating in the programme.

The compromise solution adopted was to continue to give priority to 18 to 25 year olds although, in duly justified cases, the age limit of 25 could be exceeded.

The documents distributed by national agencies do not however make any mention of the possibility of exceeding the age limit of 25.

1. Why not?

2. Would the legislative provisions be properly implemented if the age limit of 25 were exceeded in certain cases?

3. Who is responsible for taking such a decision (national agencies, Commission, sending or host organisations etc.)?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(20 January 1999)

The Honourable Member draws the Commission's attention to the fact that the information material on the European Voluntary Service (EVS) distributed by the national agencies does not specifically mention the possibility, in duly justified cases, of exceeding the age limits for young people participating in the programme.

It is correct that this possibility is not specifically mentioned in the pamphlets intended to make a broad target group aware of the opportunities offered by the EVS programme. However, the User's Guide, which is the main tool for helping young people and organisations to prepare a project, specifically refers to the possibility of flexible application of the age limits for young people(1). In future, the Commission will ensure that this flexibility is clearly mentioned in other information relating to the programme.

EVS projects are largely decentralised. The national agencies are responsible for selecting "sending projects" involving young people. In the case of multilateral or special projects, the Commission is responsible for the selection of "sending projects."

At meetings of the programme committee or with the national agencies, the Commission has always made it clear that the age limits may be applied in a flexible manner if this is duly justified.

(1) "User's guide" Part II, the partners in an EVS project.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3952/98

by Nuala Ahern (V) to the Council

(4 January 1999)

Subject: German Government's plans to halt nuclear reprocessing

What coordination has been undertaken by the Presidency in the Troika to take forward the German Government's plans to halt nuclear reprocessing and introduce "safe storage" alternatives for irradiated spent nuclear fuel and other radioactive waste?

Reply

(15 March 1999)

The German Government's plan to which the Honourable Member refers is a matter for the Member State concerned.

The Council has not to date received a Commission proposal on the management of radioactive waste, to which the aspects raised in this question relate.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3902/98

by Patricia McKenna (V) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Participation of Commissioner Ritt Bjerregaard in the 1995 Bilderberg meeting

Concerning the Bilderberg meeting attended by Commissioner Bjerregaard in Bürgenstock from 8-11 June 1995, could the Commission state:

1. What the items were which made up the total travel and whether the costs were reimbursed at the time, or if not who paid them?

2. Since Bilderberg normally pays the lavish accommodation, should this be declared by the Commissioner?

3. Did the Commissioner receive the specified subsistence allowance for the days of the trip?

4. Did the Commissioner take leave of absence for this trip?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3743/98

by Maartje van Putten (PSE) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: EU aid to France for the "Route forestière du Port des Moines" in Morvan (Burgundy)

1. Is the Commission aware of the deforestation taking place in various parts of the "Route forestière du Port des Moines", that the deforestation involves species of conifers, that water resources in the area are affected and that the natural values of the area are impaired and a drought is occurring as a result?

2. What are the Commission's views of the affect on natural values in the regional natural park in the light of the fact that the region receives European financing via the structural funds (SPD Burgundy, Objective 5a regions 1994-1999, EAGGF money)?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(2 February 1999)

The operational programmes part-financed by the Structural Funds in rural areas (Objective 5(b)) are implemented in a decentralised manner by the regional authorities responsible for selecting the projects. The Burgundy region authorities consulted by the Commission have informed it of difficulties in identifying the "Route forestière du Port des Moines". To allow a more detailed reply to the question raised, more precise geographical references are required (name of the commune and of the forest in question).