ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2538/96 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (8 October 1996)

Subject: The environment and sustainable development

The programme outlined by the Commission in the proposal for a European Parliament and Council decision on the review of the European Community programme of policy and action in relation to the environment and sustainable development 'Towards Sustainability' (COM(95)0647) ((OJ C 140, 11.5.1996, p. 5. )) provides a comprehensive list of measures at Community level. Both the proposal as a whole and the Commission's choice of priorities are to be commended.

Would the Commission not agree, however, that it should expand on the programme as far as possible by establishing clear deadlines and objectives for its main points, both because of the need to give all participants greater certainty with regard to the programming arrangements and for reasons relating to the political structure of the proposal itself?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (13 November 1996)

The fifth action programme ((COM(94) 453 final. )) is essentially targeted towards the year 2000, but provision was made for a comprehensive review of its strategy to be carried out before the end of 1995. In the resolutions of the Parliament and the Council a review was explicitly requested. This review was carried out during 1995 and resulted in a progress report, an updated state of the environment report published by the European environment agency, and the proposal for a decision by Parliament and Council on the review, which the Honourable Member cites.

The prime objective of the proposal for a decision is to give a renewed political impulse to the implementation of the fifth action programme and to progress on sustainable development by refocussing priority actions within the existing programme towards key areas where the Community should take the initiative to overcome obstacles to implementation as identified in the progress report. It is however recognized that the success of the programme also depends on the active participation of public authorities, public and private enterprise, and the general public, both citizens and consumers.

It was not the intention half way into the lifetime of the programme to revise it or to propose a new programme. As far as the Commission is concerned, the objectives, the targets for 2000 and the deadlines included in the original programme are still valid. In putting forward a proposal for a decision, the Commission intended that its adoption by Council and Parliament under the co-decision procedure would ensure firstly a new commitment to the strategy set out in the original programme and secondly agreement on priorities on how to achieve this. In line with Article 130s.3 of the EC Treaty the Council (and where applicable the Parliament) will decide on the specific measures to implement the programme. The Commission will put these proposals forward in due course.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3280/96 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (5 December 1996)

Subject: Criteria for talking account of the 'hidden economy'

The media are increasingly reflecting the current difficulty of obtaining universally accepted statistics.

What criteria are used to estimate the size of the 'hidden economy' when calculating GDP?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3280/96, E-3298/96, E-3299/96, E-3300/96, E-3301/96, E-3302/96, E-3303/96, E-3304/96, E-3305/96, E-3306/96, E-3307/96, E-3308/96, E-3309/96, E-3310/96, E-3311/96, E-3312/96 and E-3313/96 given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (21 January 1997)

It is not possible at this stage to accurately estimate the impact of the hidden economy on gross domestic product, since the methods used differ considerably from one Member State to the next and several Member States also make implicit corrections which are very difficult to assess.

It is intended that the work on the issue of exhaustiveness be completed by the end of 1998, and it should then be possible to compile the estimates requested with a certain degree of reliability and comparability between Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2934/96 by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission (8 November 1996)

Subject: Cooperation between the Dominican Republic and Haiti

Has the Commission taken note of the resolution of the ACP-EU Assembly of 26 September 1996 which referred to the increasing cooperation between the Dominican Republic and Haiti with regard to development projects?

What practical initiatives has the Commission taken to encourage this cooperation and what actual cooperation projects are or will be involved?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (5 December 1996)

The Commission has indeed taken note of the Assembly's resolution of 26 September.

Under the Lomé Convention the Commission collaborates with Cariforum, whose membership is made up of the ACP countries in the Caribbean region and which is the central clearing house for all applications for regional cooperation programmes eligible for financial assistance from the European Development Fund (EDF) in the Caribbean region and has a hand in their preparation. Several programmes have already been financed on that basis by the 7th EDF (indicative programme: ECU 105 million). Some have already been approved and put in hand; others are still in the preparatory phase.

The two countries referred to are involved, on that basis, in major programmes initiated in sectors supported by the Commission, e.g. a programme to promote trade and economic integration (ECU 14 million); a programme to support inter-university cooperation and improve studies for masters' degrees (ECU 22.4 million); a project to promote and improve the tourist industry (ECU 12.8 million); and a programme of assistance for credit, research, training and diversification in agriculture (ECU 22.4 million). An environmental programme (ECU 11 million) and various minor projects, designed in particular to improve post and communication services in Caribbean countries, are in preparation.

A survey for identifying projects to foster social and economic development in the border regions of Haiti and the Dominican Republic is also in preparation as part of regional and (as in this case) bilateral cooperation.

A number of cooperation programmes bringing the two countries concerned more closely together should - in principle - still receive financial assistance under both the 7th and 8th EDFs.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2402/96 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (6 September 1996)

Subject: Decision 94/730/EC establishing simplified procedures concerning the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified plants - conflict with Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91

1. How can Regulation No 2092/91 ((OJ L 198, 22.7.1991, p. 1. )) be transposed if, in accordance with point 6.1. of the Annex to Decision 94/730/EC ((OJ L 292, 12.11.1994, p. 31. )), details such as the site of the experimental area do not necessarily have to be specified?

2. The Council and the Commission agreed that the use of genetically modified organisms in organic farming is at present out of the question. However, if information is withheld pursuant to point 6.1. a farm using organic methods can no longer guarantee this.

What does the Commission think about this problem?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2394/96, E-2395/96, E-2396/96, E-2397/96, E-2398/96, E-2399/96, E-2400/96, E-2401/96, E-2402/96, E-2403/96 and E-2405/96 given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (14 October 1996)

The answers to the Written Questions indicated above raise a number of technical and legal problems concerning the implementing of Directive 90/220/EEC, ((OJ L 117, 8.5.1990. )) and in particular the arrangements for introducing simplified procedures.

The Commission is currently examining the way the Directive has been implemented since entering into force. It will be publishing a report, which will be sent to Parliament and the Council.

It is within this framework that the Honourable Member's questions will be examined, whereupon the Commission may take account of the points raised.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3098/96 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (18 November 1996)

Subject: Primate research

What action is the Commission taking to reduce the use of non-human primates for research?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3098/96 and E-3100/96 given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (19 December 1996)

It is legal to import primates into the Community. National authorities consider there are essential needs for primates in biomedical research, which cannot be met by the supply and use of animals already available in the Community.

In spite of the activities of the European primate resources network (Eupren), which was established in order to promote the breeding and ensure the availability of primates in the Community, the number of purpose-bred primates does not cover the needs of European research. Consequently, the need for their import still remains.

A European congress on the ethics of animal experimentation was held in Brussels on 17-18 December 1996. It is expected that one outcome of this congress will be a consensus position on the ethics of the issue supported by researchers and by those concerned with animal welfare.

The Commission is conscious of the importance of this issue which is regularly discussed in its meetings with national authorities on the implementation of Directive 86/609/EEC ((OJ No L 358, 18.12.1986. )) concerning the protection of laboratory animals.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3176/96 by Gianfranco Dell'Alba (ARE) to the Commission (22 November 1996)

Subject: Implementation of Objective 5(b) programmes for Umbria region

In accordance with the operational programme intended to give effect to Objective 5(b) of Regulation (EEC) No 2081/93 ((OJ L 193, 31.7.1993, p. 5. )) in the period from 1994 to 1999, the amount allotted to Umbria in 1994, totalling Lit 2 252 239 000, was subject to programming, coordination, and supervision by ESAU (Regional Law 4/83).

The Umbrian regional authorities requested farming organizations to report on the expenditure incurred and activities carried out in connection with Objective 5(b).

The reports are incomplete and do not serve to demonstrate that the activities were in keeping with their real aims, since only the following information is provided: (a) title of project and area of activity; (b) number of technicians involved; (c)number of hours worked; and (d) list of firms concerned.

EU bodies have so far not checked the documents relating to Objective 5(b) in the year 1994.

1. Why have the reports not been checked by EU officials?

2. Does the Commission not believe that the reports ought to be re-examined in order to ascertain that the personnel actually employed match the budget allocated?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (8 January 1997)

This programme was adopted by Commission Decision on 21 December 1994 and an initial advance of ECU 2,35 million was paid on 13 January 1995. Despite several reminders, no further applications for an advance have been made to the Commission. It will therefore take the necessary steps to discover how the first advance was used.

Responsibility for the correct application and monitoring of jointly funded operations lies with the Member State. The Commission monitors the implementation of the programmes. This activity, based on a risk analysis, can be carried out only on a limited sample. The Commission does not have sufficient means to carry out on the spot inspections for each programme, much less undertake them every year. However, once it has received the information requested, the Commission will decide whether an on the spot inspection is called for.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3034/96 by Gerardo Fernández-Albor (PPE) to the Commission (11 November 1996)

Subject: Alarm in the Union's fisheries insurance sector

In 1995, the insurers of Spanish fishing vessels suffered significant losses as a result of the high number of incidents involving Spanish vessels.

The insurance sector paid out nine thousand million pesetas in indemnity payments to the ship-owners, whilst the fisheries sector paid eight thousand five hundred million in premiums. This represents a continuation of the trend observed over the last ten years in which the accident rate in the fisheries sector has led to losses in the corresponding insurance sector.

Given that the situation is increasingly serious, with a worrying medium term outlook, since this negative trend will not be borne by the insurance sector indefinitely, does the Commission consider that joint consideration should be given to the matter in an effort to provide solutions to a situation which may at any time become explosive?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (9 January 1997)

Declining fish stocks have caused fishing enterprises to intensify operations in difficult conditions.

The Spanish fishing fleet, like the Community fishing fleet, is undergoing large-scale restructuring aimed at cutting capacity so as to adapt to available and accessible resources. This restructuring, which qualifies for Community aid, is intended to enable the Community fishing fleet to become profitable again.

The Commission's view is that the European insurance industry is capable by itself of resolving any problems which may arise in connection with insurance for Spanish fishing boats. It does not consider it necessary to intervene in national insurance markets and initiate discussions with a view to adopting guidelines on insurance for the Spanish fishing fleet.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3396/96 by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (5 December 1996)

Subject: Total ban on asbestos in brake linings

What plans does the Commission have for introducing a total ban on the use of asbestos in brake linings?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (22 January 1997)

The Community has operated a policy of control on the marketing of asbestos containing products since the mid-1980's. Accordingly, all but one of the asbestos fibres are totally banned and fourteen categories of products containing the last remaining fibre, known as chrysotile, are also banned. Other product categories containing chrysotile fall outside the scope of the Community harmonization and should be allowed to circulate freely provided they are properly labelled and subject to Articles 30-36 of the EC Treaty and to case law.

In banning fourteen categories of products containing chrysotile the Community has removed from its market those products most likely to lead to release of chrysotile fibres during conditions of use and thereby most likely to present a risk.

In response to proposals recently submitted by Member States, the Commission is considering amending Directive 71/320/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the braking devices of certain categories of motor vehicles and of their trailers ((OJ L 202, 6.9.1971. )), (as last amended by Commission Directive 91/422/EEC ((OJ L 233, 22.8.1991. ))), to state 'Brake linings shall not contain asbestos'. This provision could apply to brake pads and linings fitted as original equipment and also to replacement brake linings sold on the aftermarket. A new version of the directive, 'the consolidated braking directive', has been submitted for approval by the committee for adaptation to technical progress.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2851/96 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (25 October 1996)

Subject: Nuclear energy in the Slovak Republic

1. By what percentage are the additional costs for the reconstruction of Bohunice and the completion and retrofitting of Mochovce likely to exceed the costs as originally estimated?

2. (a) Experience suggests that with complex projects of this nature over a long period of time which is difficult to plan in advance the budget can be exceeded by several thousand percent. Are there any additional Hermes and Cofase financial guarantees, and who is responsible for this?

(b) Who assesses the needs?

(c) Who decides on whether to provide additional loans?

(d) Who pays the additional costs?

3. What liability obligations and costs are being borne by Siemens and Framatome, and what are the implications of this?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (6 January 1997)

As the Commission is not financially supporting the re-construction of the Mochovce nuclear plant, it is not in a position to comment on the cost estimates or liability obligations of those involved in the construction of that plant.

The Slovak government has provided an assurance that Bohunice NPP-V-I will be shut down in the year 2000 at the latest provided that the first and second unit of Mochovce nuclear plant are in commercial operation by that time.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3600/96 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (3 January 1997)

Subject: Budget heading B5-722: Information society

With reference to the financial year 1995 and budget heading:

B5-722: Information society

1. Can the Commission say whether subsidies were granted to private or public bodies?

2. If they were, can the Commission provide a breakdown of the exact amount of the subsidy for each body and for each activity?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3598/96, E-3600/96, E-3603/96, E-3604/96, E-3605/96, E-3606/96, E-3607/96, E-3608/96, E-3609/96, E-3610/96, E-3611/96, E-3612/96, E-3613/96, E-3614/96, E-3615/96, E-3616/96, E-3617/96, E-3618/96, E-3620/96, E-3621/96, E-3622/96, E-3623/96, E-3624/96, E-3625/96, E-3627/96, E-3629/96, E-3630/96, E-3631/96, E-3632/96, E-3633/96, E-3634/96, E-3635/96, E-3636/96, E-3637/96, E-3638/96, E-3641/96, E-3642/96 and E-3644/96 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (14 February 1997)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2891/96 by David Bowe (PSE) to the Commission (31 October 1996)

Subject: Control of hormones in meat

Could the Commission list the number, dates and places of checks undertaken in the last three years of third country slaughterhouses which are authorized to produce meat for export to the Union, under the requirements of Directive 86/469/EEC ((OJ L 275, 26.9.1986, p. 36. ))?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (18 December 1996)

The Commission has been conducting regular inspection visits since 1980 to slaughterhouses in non-Community countries which export their beef and veal, pigmeat, sheepmeat and horsemeat to the Community.

Over the last three years, these visits have followed the schedule given in the table which is being sent directly to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.

The visits are carried out in principle every year by veterinary inspectors, who check that the establishments concerned meet the requirements of Directive 72/462/EEC ((OJ L 302, 31.12.1972. )) and Directive 86/469/EEC concerning the examination of animals and fresh meat for the presence of residues
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3630/96 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (3 January 1997)

Subject: Budget heading B3-4012: Measures to achieve equality between men and women

Can the Commission provide a breakdown of the figures, for each association and activity subsidised, for the subsidies granted in the financial year 1995, under budget heading:

B3-4012: Measures to achieve equality between men and women?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3598/96, E-3600/96, E-3603/96, E-3604/96, E-3605/96, E-3606/96, E-3607/96, E-3608/96, E-3609/96, E-3610/96, E-3611/96, E-3612/96, E-3613/96, E-3614/96, E-3615/96, E-3616/96, E-3617/96, E-3618/96, E-3620/96, E-3621/96, E-3622/96, E-3623/96, E-3624/96, E-3625/96, E-3627/96, E-3629/96, E-3630/96, E-3631/96, E-3632/96, E-3633/96, E-3634/96, E-3635/96, E-3636/96, E-3637/96, E-3638/96, E-3641/96, E-3642/96 and E-3644/96 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (14 February 1997)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4078/96 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (17 January 1997)

Subject: Surveillance and control of communicable diseases

The proposal for a European Parliament and Council Decision setting up a network for the epidemiological surveillance and control of communicable diseases (COM(96)0078) ((OJ C 123, 26.4.1996, p. 10. )) subdivides such diseases into two groups:

- diseases preventable by vaccination (tuberculosis, tetanus, poliomyelitis, diptheria, meningitis, measles, mumps, rubella, influenza and influenza syndromes, etc.);

- sexually-transmitted diseases (hepatitis B, AIDS/HIV, chlamydiasis, etc.);

- viral hepatitis (including hepatitis C and other as yet unclassified categories of hepatitis);

- food-borne diseases (listeriosis, salmonellosis, etc.);

- water-borne diseases and diseases of environmental origin (legionellosis, etc.);

- nosocomial infections;

- other diseases transmissible by non-conventional agents (including Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, etc.); and

- diseases covered by the International Health Regulations (yellow fever, cholera, plague).

The diseases mentioned in the Annex to the proposal must represent an indicative list. Can the Commission ensure that this list is updated, with the active collaboration of experts from the Member States?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (6 February 1997)

The annexe to the proposal for a Parliament and Council decision creating a network for the epidemiological surveillance and control of communicable diseases in the Community may be amended in accordance with the procedure provided in Article 4 of the proposal. That procedure foresees assistance to the Commission by representatives from the Member States, thus satisfying the request formulated by the Honourable Member.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3531/96 by Philippe De Coene (PSE) to the Commission (12 December 1996)

Subject: Romanian legislation on homosexuality

Romania is a member of the Council of Europe and a prospective member of the European Union. The European Union has incorporated respect for the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR) in Article F of its Treaty, and it might reasonably be assumed that prospective Member States would also respect the ECHR. The old Romanian legislation prohibiting all homosexual acts was suspended in 1994 by the Constitutional Court as part of the process of bringing legislation in line with the provisions of the ECHR. The Constitutional Court called for the law to be liberalized. In early September 1996 the Romanian parliament adopted a new law which makes all homosexual acts, including those in private, as well as membership of homosexual and lesbian movements criminal offences. The law has been made more stringent, rather than less so.

If a country infringes the ECHR in this way, does it satisfy the conditions for membership of the European Union? Is the Commission prepared to ask the Romanian government to amend the law by bringing it in line with the international provisions of the ECHR?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (20 January 1997)

Recent years have seen considerable improvements in Romania's human rights situation. The country's new president and the prime minister have unequivocally committed themselves to honouring their international obligations in the matter of human rights.

The Commission is aware that the reform of the Penal Code, and more specifically of the provisions on homosexuality, has run into difficulties in the Chamber and the Senate.

The Commission has welcomed the Romanian Government's statement of 18 September last year concerning Article 200 of the Penal Code, which makes plain its intent to bring the country's legislation into line with its human rights commitments under the Council of Europe.

The Commission will be continuing discussions with the Romanian authorities on this subject.