ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1434/96 by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission (12 June 1996)

Subject: Human rights and democracy in Cuba

1. Is the Commission aware of the very critical report by the Netherlands Pax Christi on the human rights situation and lack of democracy in Cuba?

2. Is it aware that the ECU 15 million in humanitarian and food aid being sent to Cuba through ECHO, according to various sources, is only technically being sent to 'NGOs' but is in reality reaching military hospitals, tourist hotels and dollar shops?

3. Does the Commission not consider that, in view of the repeated critical reports concerning this aid, an independent inquiry would be appropriate and is it prepared to set up such an inquiry?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (2 July 1996)

1. The Commission is indeed aware of the existence of the report referred to by the Honorary Member.

2. To date neither the Commission's liason office in Havana, nor the NGOs involved in humanitarian operations financed by the Commission, have found any evidence that this aid is being diverted.

The humanitarian aid funded by the Commission is distributed through a network of health centres selected by the Commission and covering the whole country. It should be stressed that the appraisal of the population's needs as well as the selection of those who are to benefit from aid (children, pregnant women, the elderly and the sick) has been carried out with the close cooperation of the NGOs working with the Commission.

3. Humanitarian aid in Cuba has been the subject of evaluation and inspection missions and such missions are always independent. Furthermore, the presence of a Commission coordinator on the ground meant every stage of the operation was monitored.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1683/96 by Jaak Vandemeulebroucke (ARE) to the Commission (24 June 1996)

Subject: Catalan

What measures has the Commission taken in the light of the European Parliament's resolution on languages in the Community and the situation of Catalan (A3-0169/90 ((OJ C 19, 28.1.1991, p.42.)) as regards:

1. the publication in Catalan of the treaty texts,

2. the use of Catalan for disseminating information on the European institutions,

3. the inclusion of Catalan in programmes set up for teaching European languages?

4. the use of Catalan by the Commission's offices in its written and oral dealings with the public in the region concerned?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (5 August 1996)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the reply it gave to his oral question H-557/96 during question time at Parliament's July 1996 part-session ((Debates of the Parliament (July 1996). )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0934/96 by Shaun Spiers (PSE) to the Commission (23 April 1996)

Subject: Multi-annual work programme for cooperatives, mutuals, associations and foundations (CMAF)

In view of the importance of the initiatives contained in the multi-annual work programme for cooperatives, mutuals, associations and foundations (1994-96), which regrettably appears to be stalled in the Council of Ministers, can the Commission confirm that it intends to present a follow-on work programme to Parliament? If so, when?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (29 May 1996)

The multi-annual programme (1994-96) of work for cooperatives, mutual societies, associations and foundations in the Community ((OJ C 87 of 24 March 1994. )) was adopted by the Commission on 16 February 1994. Due to the elections in June 1994, the Parliament was not able to give its opinion until the March 1995 session, and the Commission forwarded its amended proposal ((Doc. COM(95) 253 final. )) to the Council in May 1995. The examination of this document by the Council, which began in June 1995, is continuing under the Italian presidency.

The Commission has, nevertheless, been able to apply the measures foreseen by this programme, thanks to appropriations entered by the budgetary authority three years ago under the specific heading B5-321 on the 'social economy'.

The Commission is awaiting the results of the Council's examination of its proposal. The Italian presidency wishes to continue this work in order to reach a common position on the 1994-1996 programme.

This action would appear to be in full accord with the declarations and initiatives which the Commission has consistently adopted in favour of this sector since 1990.

Having repeatedly stressed the importance of this sector as, among other things, a source of new jobs and of increased solidarity among citizens, the Commission has no intention of discontinuing its actions in favour of cooperatives, mutual societies, associations and foundations.

The Commission is aware that the Parliament, in accord with the most representative movements and the Economic and Social Committee, has given priority to defining a policy in favour of cooperatives, mutual societies, associations and foundations.

The Commission has, on several occasions, consulted the European advisory committee on cooperatives, mutual societies, associations and foundations on drawing up the new programme for 1997-2000.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1466/96 by Rolf Linkohr (PSE) to the Commission (12 June 1996)

Subject: Memorandum of Understanding between the G7 countries and Ukraine on Chernobyl

1. Can the Commission say whether the Memorandum of Understanding between Ukraine and the G7 countries on the shutdown of the Chernobyl reactors still has to be ratified by the Ukrainian Parliament?

2. Is the Commission aware of a timetable for shutting down the Chernobyl reactors that are still on line?

3. What costs will the EU incur under the Memorandum of Understanding between Ukraine and the G7 countries?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (3 July 1996)

1. In the framework of the negotiations of the Memorandum of understanding (MoU), the Ukrainian authorities have not indicated that it would need to be ratified by the Ukrainian Parliament.

2. The Ukrainian President has decided that unit 1 would be shut down in 1996 and that unit 3 would be shut down in 1999. This is in line with the provisions of the MoU and was confirmed by President Kuchma at the April 1996 Moscow nuclear Group of seven summit.

3. The Commission is still actively involved in the preparation of the projects referred to in the MoU and final details of the technical scope and detailed cost estimates are still being elaborated. It is therefore not yet possible to give a response to the question of financial costs for the Group of seven and in particular for the Community as a result of the implementation of the MoU.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1144/96 by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission (3 May 1996)

Subject: Reducing noise pollution on M20 motorway - Kent

The opening of the final section of the M20 motorway between Maidstone and Ashford in Kent, partly funded by the EU, has caused concern to residents in the area. The impact from the noise intrusion has been considerable, affecting their lifestyle and blighting their properties.

The finished road surface is brushed concrete which is noisier in use than other surfaces such as porous asphalt. The original forecast noise levels set for the design were much lower than has been found in practice. Consequently, no physical noise attenuation measures such as roadside barriers or mounds could be installed, although double glazing has since been offered. This does not afford protection to the wider environment such as gardens or open spaces, is not effective in the summer, and was not offered to all affected households.

Given that the EU part-funded this road, and given its statute as part of the Trans-European Network, will the Commissioner examine this problem and give consideration to making funds available to combat this particular form of road noise pollution?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (7 June 1996)

On the question relating to standards for road construction to mitigate noise, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-403/96 from Mr Megahy ((OJ C 217, 26.7.1996. )). The Commission would highlight in particular that, under its fourth framework programme for research, it is undertaking research on road design and construction techniques which may form the basis of future standards. Noise generation cases are part of that programme.

Where Community financing is concerned, the M20 project has benefitted from Community financial support under the transport infrastructure programmes 1986 and 1989 (9 MECU in 1986 and 2.8 MECU in 1989 for the construction of the Maidstone-Ashford section).

As the Honourable Member knows, under the Regulation laying down general rules for the granting of Community financial aid in trans-European networks ((Council Regulation (EC) n° 2236/95, OJ L 228, 23.9.1995. )), the financial support may take the form of feasibility studies, loan guarantees, interest rate subsidies and, exceptionally, direct grants to investments. Support is chiefly intended to overcome any financial obstacles which may arise during the start-up phase of a trans-European network project. The cost of noise and other environmental mitigation works can be considered for support under this Regulation if they form part of a new or upgraded project.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1253/96 by Peter Skinner (PSE) to the Commission (23 May 1996)

Subject: Seized land and property in the former Yugoslavia

In reference to Mr Kronenburg's letter of 9 February, reference number EK/md D(96), I am prompted to question further the rights of land and property owners in the former Yugoslavia.

The principle of land ownership is at stake in Bosnia and the entire former Yugoslavia. Annex 7 stipulates that 'They shall have the right to have restored to them the property of which they were deprived...and to be compensated for any property that cannot be restored to them.' You state in your letter of 9 February that it is for the international community to verify compliance with the provisions. What action will the Commission take if Annex 7 to the Dayton Agreement is not implemented successfully under the full terms of the agreement in order to ensure that those who owned land and property in Krajinas should still be able to exercise that right.

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (5 July 1996)

Annex 7 to the General framework agreement for peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina does not apply to the area of the so-called Krajinas in Croatia. Its implementation does not therefore, directly affect former land owners from the Krajinas. The Commission does, however, follow developments in Croatia closely with a view to ascertaining that the legitimate rights of those who have fled from the Krajinas are respected.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1313/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (3 June 1996)

Subject: NGO cooperation in the field of disability

What proportion in number, amounts and percentages of NGO cooperation in the field of disability is allocated by Member State this year, and separately by disability sector (cross-disability, physical disability, sensory disability, learning disability and mental health)? Will the Commission develop criteria to ensure a fair and balanced allocation to disability NGOs across all countries and benefiting all persons with disability?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (18 July 1996)

The co-financing of non governmental organization (NGO) activities takes place in the context of the Helios II action programme established by Council Decision of 25 February 1993. This financial support is directed towards European cooperation activities which have to involve at least three Member States. Once the funding has been approved, it is then paid in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity. The Commission consequently is not aware of the exact proportions allocated by Member State and by disability sector. Nevertheless, in the overall financing of NGO activities, the Commission takes care to ensure that a geographical balance is respected.

As to the development of criteria to ensure a fair and balanced allocation to disability NGOs, the Commission is already aware of the need to ensure that there is a balance in the support given to the different disability and integration sectors and will continue its efforts to maintain such a balance.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1241/96 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (23 May 1996)

Subject: COM - Fruit and vegetables

In regard to the proposal for a Council regulation on the common organization of the market in fruit and vegetables (COM(95)434 final ((OJ C 52, 21.2.1996, p. 1. ))), does the Commission not consider it necessary to introduce financial compensation measures to maintain activities relating to the environment and to safeguard jobs in agriculture? There is also a need to take into account the commitments entered into in the WTO negotiations, above all the gradual reduction in Community preference. Such a reduction cannot however entail a general fall in the Community's fruit and vegetable production to levels below 40% of consumption, regarded as a strategic figure for the EU.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (27 June 1996)

The Commission has paid particular attention to environmental considerations in its proposal for a Council regulation on the common organization of the market in fruit and vegetables, which lays down that the production and marketing of fruit and vegetables must be compatible with the requirements of environmental protection. This applies to cultivation techniques, the management of equipment and the elimination of products withdrawn from production, in particular to protect water quality and biodiversity and to maintain the countryside.

These activities will be developed in the framework of the operational programmes to be implemented by the producer organizations using public funds.

In any case, under the common agricultural policy the fruit and vegetable sector, like all agricultural sectors, benefits from horizontal measures on environmental protection. Thus, Council Regulation (EEC) No 2078/92 on agricultural production methods compatible with the requirements of the protection of the environment and the maintenance of the countryside ((OJ L 215, 30.7.1992 )) set up an assistance scheme to encourage farmers to introduce or to maintain production methods which are compatible with stricter requirements for protection of the environment and natural resources or maintenance of rural areas and the countryside.

According to the information available to the Commission, Community self-supply rates lie well above the 40% mark. The Commission does not expect these levels to drop in the next few years.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1018/96 by Dominique Baudis (PPE) to the Commission (3 May 1996)

Subject: Classification of the Golfe du Lion as a sensitive area

The rate at which the Golfe du Lion is deteriorating means that it is no longer possible to restock ponds with alevins.

Economic activity on the coast is therefore under threat. Will the Commission classify the Golfe du Lion as a sensitive area in order to secure the region's economic future.

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (24 June 1996)

The concept of a 'sensitive area' does not exist at Community level. Boxes are areas where fishing is permanently or temporarily restricted and they are covered by the Common Fisheries Policy. Vulnerable zones, special protection zones and special areas of conservation are subject to Community environmental policy. The designation and delimitation of these areas is the concern of the Member States.

However, regions experiencing socioeconomic problems may be eligible for aid from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the European Social Fund (ESF) under the regional objectives of the Structural Funds. On the Languedoc-Roussillon coast of France, just two zones, one near the border with Spain and the other in the area around Sète, have been classified as, respectively, Objective 5b (rural development) and Objective 2 (industrial decline). Furthermore, the financial instrument for fisheries guidance (FIFG) is not subject to geographical limitations, within the limits laid down by Council Regulation (EC) nº 3699/93. ((OJ L 346, 31.12.1993. ))
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1088/96 by José Barros Moura (PSE) to the Commission (13 May 1996)

Subject: Illegal duplicate files on officials

Bearing in mind Mr Liikanen's answer of 9 April 1996 to my Written Question E-0612/96, ((OJ C 183, 24.6.1996, p. 42.)) and pointing out that the term used in the original Portuguese question to describe the answer was 'insuficiente' rather than 'inadequada', can the Commissioner answer the following:

1. Is, then, all for the best in the best of all possible worlds, even though this is evidently not the view taken in the judgment handed down on 11 October 1995 by the Court of First Instance?

2. Is it the Commission's sole task to defend the standpoint of the service, or should it not also act as 'guardian' of Community legality?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (10 June 1996)

1. In its answer to Question E-612/96 by the Honourable Member, the Commission merely recalled the terms of the judgment of the Court of First Instance, which annulled the administrative decision not to put certain documents into an official's personal file.

The Court awarded the official compensation for non-material damage which he had suffered and rejected his claims for damages for material loss as regards his career.

The Commission has given effect to the Court's judgement.

2. At no stage in the proceedings was there any question of defending the standpoint of the department in question, and the Commission, as always, considers itself as the guardian of legality in Community business.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1624/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (24 June 1996)

Subject: Delays in agreeing development projects in Latin America

Which EU development project in Latin America agreed in the last year experienced the longest delay from the time of first application to the Commission, and what was the length of that delay?

Which further EU development project in Latin America agreed in the last year required the highest number of signatures of approval and what was this number?

Does the Commission have any proposals to improve efficiency, flexibility and decentralised decision-making in relation to its development cooperation in the region?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (15 July 1996)

The Commission is aware of the timescale involved in processing development projects, the causes of which are twofold: first, the administrative procedures for project assessment, which are designed to guarantee that the projects approved by the Commission are of the requisite quality and comply with the rules on rational and transparent management of Community funds; second, the limited number of staff available to meet the demand for cooperation, which has grown exponentially over the past few years.

The Commission's general guidelines for cooperation with Latin America from 1996 to 2000 ((COM(95) 495 final. )) set out a strategy for a more innovative, flexible type of cooperation. This will involve reviewing project management procedures on a regular basis and placing greater emphasis on annual horizontal programmes that provide for decentralized management. With the same objective in mind, the Commission delegations in Latin America will be asked to play a greater role in the management of projects and programmes at local level.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1602/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (24 June 1996)

Subject: Follow-up of the Helios Programme

How many of the evaluation studies undertaken at national or pan-European level of the Helios Programme have been undertaken by independent experts who are themselves people with disabilities?

Will the Commission confirm that, when it submits proposals for a European observatory on disability, it will specifically recruit only academics or experts who are persons with disabilities and that its overall work programme will be subject to detailed consultation with the independent European Disability Forum?

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

In accordance with the principles underlying the Helios II programme, the Commission strongly encourages participation by disabled people in all measures receiving Community support. However, the Commission does not require the registration of disabled people for this purpose. In connection with its project for the creation of an observatory on policies for the disabled, the Commission will take care to ensure that the persons entrusted with research and analysis offer the required skills and independence.

Applications from disabled persons meeting these requirements will be appreciated.

Finally, the Commission will pursue its dialogue with associations of the disabled concerning potential subjects of research.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1663/96 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Commission (24 June 1996)

Subject: Differences n tax rates between regions

The powers assigned to the Basque Autonomous Community (Spain) have enabled its institutions to establish a lower rate of company tax than that of other regions bordering the Basque country.

This difference in tax rates affects businesses located in the surrounding regions (Cantabria and La Rioja) and may lead to production investment being diverted for reasons of self-interest, namely the attraction of the lower rate.

Is the Commission aware of this situation? If so, has it considered whether this difference in tax rates constitutes a distortion of competition?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (17 July 1996)

The Commission has not been notified by the Spanish authorities of the tax aid referred to in the question. It is endeavouring to monitor developments, particularly through reports in the press. At all events, it is pursuing the matter with the Spanish authorities.

The Honourable Member should refer also to the Commission's answer to Written Question No E-1951/94 by Mr Siso Cruellas ((OJ C 30, 6.2.1995. )) concerning tax advantages offered by certain Spanish regions.