ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2293/97 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE) to the Commission (26 June 1997)

Subject: Reduction in the amount of the Community premium for sheep and goats in Greece

In the Commission's reply to my Written Question P-1783/97 ((OJ C 45, 10.2.1998, p. 102. )) on 'lower Community premiums for goats and sheep' there is evidently a misunderstanding as regards the facts on which my question was based. I was not referring to an increase in the slaughter costs for goats and sheep but to an increase in the selling price of goat and sheep meat on the European market. On the basis of that clarification and bearing in mind that the Commission accepts that there has been an appreciable overall price rise in the Community market, without saying exactly what is happening on the national, regional and local markets, particularly in Greece, I again ask the Commission to tell me on which data - how they were gathered and from which sources? - it based its finding that there was an appreciable rise in the price of goat and sheep meat even in Greece - and if so by how much? - and that the rise was such as to justify a large reduction in the premium? Finally, given the enormous difficulties which that decision creates for producers, is there any possibility of exemptions for regions where there has demonstrably not been an increase in the slaughter price for goat and sheep meat, or at least for regions which are generally problematic, such as island regions, where transport costs and production costs generally are much higher?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (22 July 1997)

The Commission has determined for each Member State a list of representative markets that notify it each week of market prices for a 'standard quality' that is the most representative for the production that is itself the most representative for trade in the Community as a whole. The list of markets and description of the products the prices of which are to be notified appear in Regulation (EEC) No 1481/86 of 15 May 1986 on the determination of prices of fresh or chilled lamb carcases on representative Community markets and the survey of prices of certain other qualities of sheep carcases in the Community ((OJ L 130, 16.5.1986. )), last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2344/96 of 9 December 1996 ((OJ L 319, 10.12.1996. )).

For Greece the 'standard quality' is lambs of 12 to 16 kg carcase weight. Prices are recorded at seven locations: Athens, Ioannina, Serres, Komotini, Larissa, Tripoli and Khania.

In Greece the average price for the 'standard quality' rose from ECU 373.3/100 kg in 1995 to ECU 392.7/100 kg in 1996, an increase of 5.2%.

The Commission would remind the Honourable Member that under the rules in force in this sector the ewe and she-goat premium is to be calculated without regard to market price differences in Member States. Since 1992 a single amount has been set that is calculated from the trend of the Community average market price for 'standard qualities'. The Commission has no plans to propose to the Council any change in these rules to take account of particular regional price or production cost differences.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2031/97 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) and Juan Colino Salamanca (PSE) to the Commission (13 June 1997)

Subject: Free movement of goods within the European Union

In May 1997 there were many incidents in France involving attacks on non-French lorries transporting fruit and vegetables. The attacks also occurred in warehouses and markets.

The French police took no action while these incidents were occurring, nor did the French authorities make any serious attempt to try to prevent the attacks.

What is the Commission's reaction to these clear, repeated attempts to hamper the free movement of persons and goods?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (1 July 1997)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Members to its answer to Written Question P-1992/97 by Mr García-Margallo y Marfil ((OJ C 45, 10.2.1998, p. 137. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2187/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (25 June 1997)

Subject: Novel food regulation No 258/97 - Laboratory standards

Are there generally binding procedures and prescribed reporting methods for the work to be carried out in laboratories?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2113/97, E-2115/97, E-2117/97, E-2119/97, E-2121/97, E-2123/97, E-2127/97, E-2129/97, E-2131/97, E-2133/97, E-2135/97, E-2137/97, E-2139/97, E-2141/97, E-2143/97, E-2145/97, E-2147/97, E-2149/97, E-2151/97, E-2153/97, E-2155/97, E-2157/97, E-2159/97, E-2161/97, E-2163/97, E-2165/97, E-2167/97, E-2169/97, E-2171/97, E-2173/97, E-2175/97, E-2177/97, E-2179/97, E-2181/97, E-2183/97, E-2185/97, E-2187/97, E-2189/97, E-2191/97, E-2193/97, E-2195/97, E-2197/97, E-2199/97, E-2201/97, E-2203/97 and E-2205/97 given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (17 September 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-1829/97 by Alfonso Novo Belenguer (ARE) to the Commission (28 May 1997)

Subject: Rice imports - cumulative recovery system

By Council Decision 95/591/EEC ((OJ L 334, 30.12.1995, p. 25. )) the European Union concluded an agreement in the form of an exchange of letters with the United States of America on cereals and rice. Under the agreement, a cumulative recovery system (CRS) was introduced for husked rice on a trial basis for a one-year period. The Commission Regulation (EC) No 703/97 ((OJ L 104, 22.4.1997, p. 12. )) introducing the cumulative recovery system has recently been published.

Bearing in mind that the above agreement adversely affects the interests of EU rice-producing countries, since it will facilitate massive imports of non-Community rice at low prices, which in turn will lead to a general fall in rice prices on the Community market, what compensatory measures will the Commission apply in order to reduce the negative impact which this arrangement will have on rice-producing countries and regions in the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (27 June 1997)

Under the cumulative recovery system (CRS) for husked rice the difference will be determined between the sum of the import duties determined in line with Regulation (EC) No 703/97 and the sum of those actually charged on release of the rice for free circulation and the under or over payment adjusted accordingly.

Since the calculation results will not be known until the end of the trial period the fact that the CRS will have on rice imports cannot be known in advance. The Commission will attentively monitor the working of the system and its impact on imports.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2173/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (25 June 1997)

Subject: Novel food regulation No 258/97 - Financial requirements for monitoring

Have additional appropriations been included in the budgets in the light of the likely duties?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2113/97, E-2115/97, E-2117/97, E-2119/97, E-2121/97, E-2123/97, E-2127/97, E-2129/97, E-2131/97, E-2133/97, E-2135/97, E-2137/97, E-2139/97, E-2141/97, E-2143/97, E-2145/97, E-2147/97, E-2149/97, E-2151/97, E-2153/97, E-2155/97, E-2157/97, E-2159/97, E-2161/97, E-2163/97, E-2165/97, E-2167/97, E-2169/97, E-2171/97, E-2173/97, E-2175/97, E-2177/97, E-2179/97, E-2181/97, E-2183/97, E-2185/97, E-2187/97, E-2189/97, E-2191/97, E-2193/97, E-2195/97, E-2197/97, E-2199/97, E-2201/97, E-2203/97 and E-2205/97 given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (17 September 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-0858/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (12 March 1997)

Subject: The environment

With regard to budget heading B4-304: Legislation and other general action based on the Fifth Action Programme on the Environment, can the Commission say whether subsidies have been granted for Italy and, if so, for which organizations and for which activities?

Supplementary joint answer to Written Questions E-0858/97, E-0859/97, E-0860/97, E-0861/97, E-0862/97, E-0863/97, E-0864/97, E-0865/97, E-0866/97, E-0867/97, E-0868/97, E-0869/97, E-0870/97 and E-0871/97 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (22 September 1997)

Further to its answer of 25 April 1997 ((OJ C 319, 18.10.1997, p. 81. )), the Commission is now able to provide the following additional information.

The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat a table containing the information requested.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2201/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (25 June 1997)

Subject: Novel food regulation No 258/97 - Access to data on novel food products

Will there be public access to these data banks, or will some data be subject to confidentiality?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2113/97, E-2115/97, E-2117/97, E-2119/97, E-2121/97, E-2123/97, E-2127/97, E-2129/97, E-2131/97, E-2133/97, E-2135/97, E-2137/97, E-2139/97, E-2141/97, E-2143/97, E-2145/97, E-2147/97, E-2149/97, E-2151/97, E-2153/97, E-2155/97, E-2157/97, E-2159/97, E-2161/97, E-2163/97, E-2165/97, E-2167/97, E-2169/97, E-2171/97, E-2173/97, E-2175/97, E-2177/97, E-2179/97, E-2181/97, E-2183/97, E-2185/97, E-2187/97, E-2189/97, E-2191/97, E-2193/97, E-2195/97, E-2197/97, E-2199/97, E-2201/97, E-2203/97 and E-2205/97 given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (17 September 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-2081/97 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (19 June 1997)

Subject: Flags of convenience and the EU fleet

As the Commission will know, Community shipowners and seamen are unjustly penalized by increasingly stiff competition from vessels flying flags of convenience, owing mainly from the fact that they are subject to much heavier taxation than shipowners and seamen from non-Community countries.

Given the above, would the Commission not agree that:

1. appropriate fiscal, social and administrative measures should be taken to put an end to the discrimination from which Community shipowners and seamen are currently suffering?

2. with a view to ensuring that the Union and Member States' flags are flown by the gigantic Community fleet sailing on the world's seas, the relief measures provided for in the 1989 Directive should be implemented as soon as possible, so as to enable Community vessels compete on equal terms with the huge number of vessels flying flags of convenience?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (24 July 1997)

On 6 May 1997, the Commission adopted revised guidelines for state aid in the maritime transport sector ((SEC(97) 747. )).

The guidelines acknowledge that the competitive difference between ships registered in the Community and those registered outside, especially those operated under flags of convenience, arises primarily from fiscal costs (corporate taxation and wage related liabilities in respect of seafarers) which have been shown by different studies to be the critical factor.

While the Commission agrees that action is urgently needed to prevent the further decline in the Community flagged fleet, especially since this decline is accompanied by loss of employment for European seafarers and the loss of maritime know-how in the Community, it is for Member States to decide whether to introduce support measures for the national fleet or not.

The revised guidelines establish a common framework for such national aid schemes and define, in particular, a transparent method of fixing the maximum aid level which will be allowed. Member States will be allowed to exempt shipping from fiscal and social charges, or to reimburse these charges. Such fiscal relief for labour costs can be granted in respect of seafarers having their fiscal domicile in a Member State and working on board an European registered vessel. Corporate tax relief for earnings derived from shipping is also allowed under certain conditions.

The Commission believes that under the new guidelines, which replace the guidelines of 1989 ((SEC(89) 921 final. )), the Member States will have better possibilities for reducing or eliminating the competitive disadvantages referred to by the Honourable Member. The first positive results - in terms of European fleet increase - have already been observed in practice.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1844/97 by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission (30 May 1997)

Subject: Parliament's budget

What is the level of Parliament's expenditure on properties?

Has Parliament's budget been increased, and by how much?

What is the level of monthly expenditure for transferring Parliament to and from Brussels and Strasbourg?

What are the annual costs of transporting Members' trunks to and from Brussels and Strasbourg?

What is the annual cost of the chauffeur service provided by Parliament?

What are the annual costs of Parliament's translation and interpretation services?

How many officials of Parliament go to Strasbourg every month for the plenary seasons?

Where do they stay if accommodation is provided by the EU?

How much does this cost?

How much would Parliament's internal costs (e.g. for translation services) increase, per state, if the countries of Eastern Europe were to accede?

Are there any studies or scenarios on this? If so, what are their conclusions, and where can they be consulted?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (25 July 1997)

The Commission is not responsible for Parliament's budget. The information requested by the honourable Member needs to be obtained from Parliament itself, for example, by addressing a question to the Bureau under Rule 28 of the Rules of Procedure.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2133/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (23 June 1997)

Subject: Novel food regulation No 258/97 - Requirements for authorization: checking information supplied by manufacturers

1. What information is supposed to be used as the basis for assessment?

2. Is there provision for independent testing of the data submitted by manufacturers?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2113/97, E-2115/97, E-2117/97, E-2119/97, E-2121/97, E-2123/97, E-2127/97, E-2129/97, E-2131/97, E-2133/97, E-2135/97, E-2137/97, E-2139/97, E-2141/97, E-2143/97, E-2145/97, E-2147/97, E-2149/97, E-2151/97, E-2153/97, E-2155/97, E-2157/97, E-2159/97, E-2161/97, E-2163/97, E-2165/97, E-2167/97, E-2169/97, E-2171/97, E-2173/97, E-2175/97, E-2177/97, E-2179/97, E-2181/97, E-2183/97, E-2185/97, E-2187/97, E-2189/97, E-2191/97, E-2193/97, E-2195/97, E-2197/97, E-2199/97, E-2201/97, E-2203/97 and E-2205/97 given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (17 September 1997)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2703/97 by Luigi Florio (UPE) to the Commission (28 July 1997)

Subject: Respect for the rights of citizenship in the case of the descendants of the House of Savoy

1. Does the Commission consider that the XIIIth transitional provision of the Constitution of the Italian Republic (which prohibits male descendants of the former kings of the House of Savoy from setting foot in Italy) is compatible with the rights attached to the institution of Union citizenship introduced in the Treaty of Maastricht and, more generally, with the principles of liberty and tolerance on which the process of European integration is based?

2. If so, does the Commission consider that exile -which is not applied in the European Union to anyone except the persons in question- is a measure that can be adopted to any useful purpose by any European State in relation to any of its citizens, whether living or as yet unborn?

3. If not, does the Commission consider that Italy should be formally requested to ensure equal respect for the civil and human rights of all its citizens, including those who happen to desend from former monarchs?

4. Finally, does the Commission regard as compatible with the rights laid down for Union citizens a solution which would enable descendants of the House of Savoy to enter Italy again without, however, enjoying certain important civil rights (such as the right to vote or to stand for election), as proposed by some politicians?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (9 September 1997)

The matter in question does not come within its jurisdiction of the Commission.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1260/97 by Quinídio Correia (PSE) to the Commission (2 April 1997)

Subject: Late payment of subsidies to banana producers in Madeira

There have recently been reports of lengthy delays in the payment of Community subsidies to banana producers of the Autonomous Region of Madeira.

- Can the Commission confirm that these delays have occurred?

- On what date were the monies transferred by the Commission to enable these subsidies to be paid and what were the amounts in question?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (21 April 1997)

Under the common organization of the market in bananas, aid is granted to organizations of Community producers to offset loss of income.

Compensatory aid for a given year is calculated in the first months of the following year, once the annual marketing data is available and has been verified. There is a problem with certain data for 1996 and additional checks are needed. This is why the balance could not be paid by the deadline of 31 March. However, the delay in payment can hardly be considered that great at this stage. Moreover, it should be remembered that producers' organizations received advances on the compensatory aid during 1996.

In view of the outstanding problems, the Commission is unable to specify either the final amount of aid or the exact date on which it will be fixed. However, some indication of the time scale involved can be given. The draft Regulation fixing the amount of compensatory aid for 1996 should be submitted to the Management Committee for Bananas in mid-April.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2171/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (25 June 1997)

Subject: Novel food regulation No 258/97 - staff required for monitoring

1. Are the staffing requirements for the various monitoring methods available, or will they be created?

2. Are there to be any special training measures for staff?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2113/97, E-2115/97, E-2117/97, E-2119/97, E-2121/97, E-2123/97, E-2127/97, E-2129/97, E-2131/97, E-2133/97, E-2135/97, E-2137/97, E-2139/97, E-2141/97, E-2143/97, E-2145/97, E-2147/97, E-2149/97, E-2151/97, E-2153/97, E-2155/97, E-2157/97, E-2159/97, E-2161/97, E-2163/97, E-2165/97, E-2167/97, E-2169/97, E-2171/97, E-2173/97, E-2175/97, E-2177/97, E-2179/97, E-2181/97, E-2183/97, E-2185/97, E-2187/97, E-2189/97, E-2191/97, E-2193/97, E-2195/97, E-2197/97, E-2199/97, E-2201/97, E-2203/97 and E-2205/97 given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (17 September 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-2169/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (25 June 1997)

Subject: Novel food regulation No 258/97 - carrying out monitoring

Are there any initiatives aimed at setting up special laboratories to carry out the monitoring duties in food monitoring bodies?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2113/97, E-2115/97, E-2117/97, E-2119/97, E-2121/97, E-2123/97, E-2127/97, E-2129/97, E-2131/97, E-2133/97, E-2135/97, E-2137/97, E-2139/97, E-2141/97, E-2143/97, E-2145/97, E-2147/97, E-2149/97, E-2151/97, E-2153/97, E-2155/97, E-2157/97, E-2159/97, E-2161/97, E-2163/97, E-2165/97, E-2167/97, E-2169/97, E-2171/97, E-2173/97, E-2175/97, E-2177/97, E-2179/97, E-2181/97, E-2183/97, E-2185/97, E-2187/97, E-2189/97, E-2191/97, E-2193/97, E-2195/97, E-2197/97, E-2199/97, E-2201/97, E-2203/97 and E-2205/97 given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (17 September 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-2498/97 by Maren Günther (PPE) to the Commission (18 July 1997)

Subject: Ensuring correct payment of doctors' fees by patients from other European countries

Problems arise with the collection of doctors' fees, particularly in cases where Portuguese patients who are employees change their place of residence frequently.

In the case of Portuguese employees it is not possible to produce evidence of insurance with a health insurance fund.

Moreover, because of frequent changes of place of residence, the particulars shown in identity documents also do not make it possible to obtain the necessary information about the patient or his insurance.

How can correct payment of doctors' fees by patients from other European countries be ensured?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (9 September 1997)

The social security systems of the Member States are coordinated by Council Regulations (EEC) No 1408/71 and 574/72 ((Updated by Regulation No 118/97 (OJ L 28, 30.1.1997), lastly amended by Regulation No 1290/97 (OJ L 176, 4.7.1997). )). Under these Regulations a person who is employed in Portugal and who is posted by his employer to perform work in another Member State continues to be subject to the Portuguese social security scheme if the posting does not exceed 12 months.

In such a case the Portuguese worker remains covered by the Portuguese health care scheme. This means that he is entitled to receive health care in Portugal and also in the Member State of actual employment. In the latter case the benefits in kind are provided by the health care scheme in the Member State of employment on behalf of the competent Portuguese health system (Article 22 and 22b of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71). In order to receive benefits the Portuguese system provides the worker with the European health care forms E 111/E 106. In addition a new form E 128 will be applicable in the future which is specially designed for posted workers who enjoy extended rights since 1 February 1997.

If the posted worker has a permanent address in the Member State of actual employment he can register with a health insurance scheme at his place of stay using form E 106. If he has no permanent address he uses form E 111 whenever he needs medical treatment. This form is the proof that the worker is covered by the Portuguese health care scheme. Any person who presents the form is entitled to medical treatment provided under the legislation of the Member State of actual employment and the Portuguese system will reimburse the costs.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1531/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (5 May 1997)

Subject: Information on EC assistance granted to the Rhineland-Palatinate from January to December 1995

In what amounts and for what measures did the Rhineland-Palatinate receive Community resources in 1995 from:

1. the European Social Fund,

2. the Fourth Framework Research Programme,

3. the European Regional Development Fund,

4. the Community environment and energy programmes,

5. the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund, Guidance and Guarantee Sections,

6. other Community programmes?

Supplementary joint answer to Written Questions E-1530/97, E-1531/97 and E-1532/97 given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (24 September 1997)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to her Written Question E-1528/97 ((OJ C 60, 25.2.1998, p. 24. )).