ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1639/98

by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission

(29 May 1998)

Subject: Discussion groups on particular topics on the Internet

Discussion groups on the Internet are made up of individuals who decide to discuss a particular subject and ask other Internet users to take part by registering their names and their voting, as required by a group of legal persons acting at present as a governing authority composed of the Centro Ricerche della Telecom, (Telecommunications Research Centre), CSELT, the University of Pisa's Electronic Centre, SERRA, and the Consorzio Interuniversitario Lombardo per l'Elaborazione Automatica, CILEA (Lombardy Interuniversity Consortium for Automatic Data Processing)..

This authority, which is recognized in practice but not by any legislation, does not however seem to be very objective.

A group of Italian citizens active in the emigration field, the CTIM, decided to start a discussion on the topic of Italian emigration world-wide and made a formal request in this connection to the GCN group, which acts as the authority.

They were then asked to confirm that they had 75 requests from users showing that they would take part in the discussion forum. The CTIM was able to produce 127 requests but was refused authorization on the grounds of irregularities in the procedures could not be proved and were never specified.

Will the Commission:

1. Take action with regard to the formation of discussion groups on particular topics by adopting a directive providing for the setting-up of an official authority?

2. Intercede with the GCN, which is organizing the Internet discussion groups in Italian in a strange manner?

3. Adopt a directive which, by defining the authority, will provide legal certainty and certainty as to the basic provisions?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(29 June 1998)

The Commission takes the view that it has no jurisdiction in this matter.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0777/98

by Christian Rovsing (PPE) to the Commission

(18 March 1998)

Subject: Eye tests for professional drivers

Does the Commission consider it to be in accordance with the intentions of the EU directive on eyesight tests for professional drivers that a 48 year old driver who has hitherto obtained a Danish professional driver's licence without problems may under the Directive lose the right to have it renewed, without any medical evidence of any form of change in his eyesight since it was last issued.

Does the Commission consider that the national authorities are entitled to discriminate between the renewal of existing professional driver's licences and the issue of new ones in their administration of the provisions of the directive?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(15 May 1998)

On the issue and renewal of driving licences in relation to the minimum standards for eyesight, the Commission would like to refer the Honourable Member to its answers to written questions P-2880/97 by Mrs Kjer Hansen(1) and P-1278/97 by Mrs Jensen(2).

In particular, the attention of the Honourable Member is drawn to the fact that the one of the purposes of Council Directive 91/439/EEC(3) was to eliminate national differences in standards pertaining to driving licences.

In its initial proposal for the Directive in 1988(4) the Commission did propose a so-called "Grandfathers' Rights" clause to permit existing holders of driving licences to be exempt from newer, more stringent standards, along the lines proposed by the Honourable Member. However, the Council rejected this clause when adopting the final text.

Provision exists for the medical requirements laid down in the Directive to be amended. However, it should be noted that at a recent meeting of the committee on the driving licence which was established by Directive 97/26/EC(5), and given the power to adapt Annexes II and III of Directive 91/439/EEC to scientific and technical progress, there was no agreement to adapt point 6.3 relating to eyesight or to introduce any grandfather rights.

(1) OJ C 117, 16.4.1998.

(2) OJ C 373, 9.12.1997.

(3) OJ L 237, 24.8.1991.

(4) COM(88) 705 final.

(5) OJ L 150, 7.6.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1835/98

by Robin Teverson (ELDR) to the Commission

(12 June 1998)

Subject: EU development aid projects

Would the Commission please provide details of past and current EU-sponsored development aid projects in Africa which include efforts to help people suffering from HIV/AIDS? Could it also indicate the amount of money devoted to these projects?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(24 June 1998)

Since 1987 the Community has committed around 200 MECU in direct support to human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immune deficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) intervention in over 90 different developing countries and to regional and international initiatives. Further support has also been mobilised through special appropriation and programmes, for example the non governmental organisations (NGO) co-financing budget line and through the Community research programme.

The Community financial support has been spread over various strategic sectors from prevention to health sector support, research, training and capacity building to technical assistance. Community financial support has also been spread over most regions of the world and the Community has worked with many different partners over the past ten years. The Community HIV/AIDS programme for developing countries has evolved and been articulated on the basis of a coherent set of aims and policy principles to govern its choice of support. Those were set out in detail in Council Regulation No (EC) 550/97 of 24 March 1997 on HIV/AIDS related operations in developing countries(1), and yearly implementation will soon be reported in more detail.

(1) OJ L 85, 27.3.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1062/98

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(6 April 1998)

Subject: Use and sale of laser pens/pointers

Will the Commission consider the use of legislation to clamp down on the use of laser pens/pointers? Are there any regulations to prohibit the sale of class 3 and class 4 laser products as defined by BSEN 60825-1 1994?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(25 May 1998)

Directive 92/59/EEC(1) on general product safety applies to laser pens and pointers. No specific Community legislation is envisaged at the present time. The Directive requires Member States to adopt the necessary measures to ensure that only safe products are placed on the Community market (Article 2,b). It is therefore the responsibility, in the first instance, of the Member States to take action with regard to products which constitute a consumer health and safety hazard, by adopting the necessary measures, including withdrawal of the product from the market if appropriate.

Through the information system described in Article 8 of Directive 92/59/EEC, the Commission has recently received five urgent notifications relating to measures adopted with regard to laser pens or pointers. In accordance with the procedure laid down, the Commission has quickly distributed this information to the authorities responsible for consumer health and safety in the Member States, to enable them in turn to take the necessary steps. The Directive in fact allows the Commission to take action against products which constitute a serious and immediate risk only if requested to do so by the Member States, and only in accordance with the various conditions laid down in Articles 9 to 11 of the Directive.

Regarding the products defined by BSEN 60825-1, the Member States which have submitted notifications to the Commission have taken action at national level which varies in scope. For example, France has issued a decree suspending the manufacture, import and marketing and calling for the withdrawal of laser pointers in class 3 upwards, and Germany has adopted similar measures. Other Member States are currently considering what action to take and have not yet informed the Commission of their intentions.

As this is a recent problem, the Commission will closely monitor future developments, in particular the measures taken by the Member States under the Directive on general product safety, in order to ensure that a high level of protection in respect of these products is provided throughout the Community.

(1) OJ L 228, 11.8.1992.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1170/98

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: General aviation

Given that the number of airfields available for general aviation use is decreasing, will the Commission undertake a feasibility study of satellite airports which could be built throughout the EU to cope with the continued demand and growth of general aviation?

Joint answer to Written QuestionsE-1168/98 and E-1170/98 given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(10 June 1998)

There is no Community legislation related to general aviation (GA) facilities at aerodromes, and it is therefore for national or local authorities to make whatever provision they think appropriate for such facilities. The Commission sympathises with the pressure on GA and its aerodromes, but considers that, in accordance with the subsidiarity principle, intervention would at this time be inappropriate.

While the Commission has no plans to undertake any feasibility studies on the provision of satellite airports for GA, the Commission does have regular contact with the business aviation industry to ensure that the sector's voice is heard and their interests taken into account.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1358/98

by Lis Jensen (I-EDN) to the Commission

(7 May 1998)

Subject: Lihir gold mine in Papua New Guinea

In July 1996 the EIB announced an ECU 46 million loan package to the Lihir gold mine in Papua New Guinea. In the 30 years of operation 104 million tonnes of ore reserves will be exploited, producing 341 million tonnes of waste rock. The waste rock would be discharged into the nearby Louisiana harbour on the east coast of Lihir Island. The mining company Rio Tinto use the open pit cyanide leaching process, which is generally known to be highly polluting. During the mine's lifespan 89 million tonnes of toxic tailings would be produced. The tailings will be treated, however the treatment water will also be discharged into a deep submarine outfall. Trace metals in the treatment water would include copper, arsenic, cadmium, lead, chromium and mercury.

The American Overseas Private Investment Corporation declined to provide a political risk insurance in 1995 because of the abovementioned environmental impacts. They do not adhere to US standards regarding waste disposal.

1. Which environmental standards have been applied by the EIB when considering the Lihir gold project?

2. Does the Lihir gold project adhere to the environmental standards of the EIB?

3. As the project is operating already, how does the EIB intend to monitor the environmental impacts, and which criteria does the EIB apply if doing so?

4. What is the EIB's policy and practice about integration of compliance with multilateral agreements into the bankability criteria for project proposals?

5. How did the EIB take into consideration the principles and practices declared in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (date of entry into force 16 November 1994) with particular reference to part XII, Article 194.1. and Part XII, Article 196.1. when it decided to support the Lihir gold mine project?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(25 June 1998)

Upon appraisal of the Lihir project in Papua New Guinea (PNG) the European investment bank (EIB) applied its current environmental standards set out in its "environmental policy statement". In line with these, the project is in compliance with all national as well as relevant internationally recognised requirements (especially Australian and United States Environmental protection agency), and follows best available and proven environmental practice. The project is also in compliance with the United Nations Convention on the law of the sea, to which PNG is party.

EIB-financed projects have to comply with those international agreements to which the host country is a party. The competent body of that country is formally responsible for compliance with such agreements. In the case of Lihir, granting of the environmental plan was conditional upon the submission, approval and adherence to an environmental management and monitoring programme with extensive reporting requirements to the respective PNG authorities. Based on this and other information, the promoter is required to send regular reports, including independent audits, to the EIB. These requirements have been respected.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1339/98

by Allan Macartney (ARE) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: The loss of market share in tourism

Is the Commission aware that Europe in general is losing world market share within the fastest expanding industry, tourism?

What steps are being considered to ensure a greater focus on measures to extend the tourist season - off-season promotions, higher levels of grant for areas with serious seasonal problems and employment subsidies so that highly trained staff can be retrained in winter months?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(15 June 1998)

The Commission is aware of Europe's decrease in world market share of tourism, in terms of international arrivals and of income generated by international tourists visiting Europe, and it is aware of the growing importance of European tourism in the context of international trade in services.

The Commission forwarded a proposal to the Council in 1996 on a multiannual programme(1) ("Philoxenia") which aims to stimulate the quality and competitiveness of European tourism in order to contribute to growth and employment. The instruments foreseen in this proposal would enable problems linked to the seasonality of European tourism to be addressed more effectively. The implications of seasonality for employment and training will be among the issues arising in the context of the work of the high level group on tourism and employment, recently established by the Commission. The group will submit its report and recommendations to the Commission by October 1998.

In addition, the Commission is taking steps, through its structural measures, to help those regions which are over-dependent on the seasonal nature of tourism. It is supporting efforts to diversify their activities, for instance by promoting the cultural heritage and high-quality products which can be marketed throughout the year, thereby fostering alternative economic development.

(1) OJ C 222, 31.7.1996.- OJ C 13, 14.1.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0918/98

by Honório Novo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(26 March 1998)

Subject: Community funding for Yazaki Saltano Ltd. of Portugal

Yazaki Saltano Ltd. of Portugal, which produces electrical components for motor vehicles and is based in Estrada da Rainha - Praia da Granja - Vila Nova de Gaia, is a Japanese company which became established in Portugal ten years ago; in 1996 it employed over seven thousand workers.

I assume that this company received Community cofunding from either the first or second CSF to meet establishment and/or development and modernization costs.

Will the Commission say whether Yazaki Saltano Ltd. of Portugal received cofunding of this kind, which programme or programmes were involved, what partial or overall funding it received and what general contractual obligations it had to agree to in order to qualify for such Community funding?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(15 May 1998)

According to information provided by the Member State, there has been no support for this company in either of the two Community support frameworks for Portugal.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1614/98

by Gary Titley (PSE) to the Commission

(25 May 1998)

Subject: Postal charges for non-commercial organizations and the REIMS II system

Given that the new REIMS II system on payments made between public post offices to cover the cost of delivering mail across national borders in the EU may, in some countries, make it likely that higher postal charges will be imposed for international mail, will be Commission propose any special treatment for non-profit making organizations, such as special lower rates, to help foster links between civil society organizations across the EU?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(18 June 1998)

The objective of the REIMS II agreement (Remuneration of exchanges of international mail) is to bring the terminal dues paid between the European postal operators concerned closer to the real costs of delivering inward cross-border mail, in accordance with the principle of cost orientation promoted by the Community.

The use of the new terminal dues will not necessarily be followed by a general increase in the national postal tariffs paid by users, but rather will result in some cases in a rebalancing of cross-border tariffs according to the product concerned.

Within the Community, it is up to the Member States to consider whether some support is needed in favour of non-profit making organisations, in case of an increase in their postal charges.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1305/98

by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: Discrimination against biology graduates

In order to be admitted to Italian schools of specialization students with degrees in medicine and other subjects (biology, chemistry, pharmacy, dentistry, etc) take part in an open competition in which qualifications and examinations are taken into account. Whilst graduates in medicine who pass the entrance examination receive an annual grant for the whole duration of the course of specialization, biology graduates do not.

Directive 82/76/EEC(1) establishes that grants should be provided for trainee specialists for the whole course of specialization and Legislative Decree No 502/92 makes the possession of a post-graduate diploma of specialization compulsory for admission to competitions for jobs in the national health service for biologists too.

In view of the above, can the Commission say:

1. whether it does not consider that biology graduates are being treated differently and are the victims of discrimination;

2. whether it does not consider that in order to remedy this situation biology graduates training to be specialists should be recognized at European level?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(24 June 1998)

The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that the matters raised by her have been referred to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling.

Accordingly, it cannot comment until the Court's ruling has been delivered.

(1) OJ L 43, 15.2.1982, p. 21.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1221/98

by Umberto Bossi (NI) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: Availability in the various national languages of information and application forms for the programme "Media II - Development and Distribution"

The European Commission published Call 6/98 for proposals for the Community programme "Media II - Development and Distribution" in Official Journal C 71 of 7 March 1998.

The information and application forms relating to this call are only available in French and English.

Does the Commission not agree that this choice, albeit arbitrary, in practice favours citizens whose mother tongue is French or English, thereby creating an unequal situation in the EU?

In view of the Commission's reply to my previous Written Question No E-2249/96(1) (... "the Commission [...] ensuring [...] that published documents directly relating to competitions, calls for proposals and manifestations of interest should be published simultaneously in all the Community languages"... ), how does the Commission justify its decision to make the documentation for Call 6/98 for the "Media II - Development and Distribution" Programme available in only two Community languages, to the exclusion of all the others?

In the light of the Commission's reply to my previous Written Question No E-1256/96(2) (paragraph VI: "Under Article 2 of Regulation No 1 laying down the rules governing the languages of the institutions of the Community, candidates may submit applications in whichever official Community language they choose"), can the Commission explain why it is not made clear in Call 6/98 that candidates can submit their applications in a language other than that in which the form is written?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(18 June 1998)

In accordance with two Council Decisions establishing the MEDIA programme (Decisions 95/564/EC and 95/563/EC)(3), the Commission, in conjunction with the Member States, has set up information offices, called MEDIA desks, in the Member States.

The aim of the MEDIA desks is to inform European professionals in the audiovisual industry of Community audiovisual policy and more particularly of the possibilities offered by the MEDIA programme. To that end, they are required to distribute and explain to professionals the calls for proposals under the MEDIA programme, which the Commission publishes in French, English and German.

In Member States where audiovisual professionals feel the need, the MEDIA desks provide translations of the guidelines and forms for the calls for proposals under the MEDIA programme. Thus each professional can obtain Commission forms in his own language. Projects presented to the Commission as part of the MEDIA programme can be in any one of the eleven official languages.

During the mid-term review of the MEDIA programme this year, the Commission will study ways to take the Honourable Member's comments into account.

(1) OJ C 11, 13.1.1997, p. 71.

(2) OJ C 322, 28.10.1996, p. 46.

(3) OJ L 321, 30.12.1995.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1757/98

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(27 May 1998)

Subject: Czech authorities ghettoise Romas

Is the European Commission aware of the fact that Czech authorities of the town Usti nad Labem are planning to ghettoise several hundred Romas by building a wall around their blocks of flats to segregate them from Czech residents and what measures will the Commission undertake to ensure that this act of racism will be stopped?

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

(18 June 1998)

The Commission is aware of the issue referred to by the Honourable Member. Senior Commission staff have raised the matter with the Czech authorities at the highest level and expressed concern.

The accession partnership for the Czech Republic of March 1998 mentions further work on the integration of the Roma as one of the priorities. The draft 1998 Phare programme for the Czech Republic foresees considerable support to achieve this through the financing of activities related to education, training, legal advice and public awareness. This support comes in addition to what Phare is providing since 1993 to improve the situation of the Roma in the Czech Republic.

It should also be noted that the Czech government, in October 1997, approved a national programme to support the Roma in their integration into Czech society. The first progress reports on this programme are expected before this summer. In line with the provisions of the accession partnership, the meeting of the Community and the Czech Association Committee of 9 July 1998 will be an appropriate occasion for the Czech authorities to report about the progress in its national programme and for the Community to reiterate its position on the situation of the Roma in that country.