ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1226/97 by Josu Imaz San Miguel (PPE) to the Commission (26 March 1997)

Subject: Contribution of the Basque Country to the Community budget

The Basque Country is one of the autonomous communities of the Spanish state and, as such, one of the regions of the European Union. Its per capita income is 88% of the EU average.

What was the Basque Country's contribution to the Community budget in 1995 and 1996, under each of the following headings: VAT resources, GNP-based resource, customs duties, Community levies and others?

How much EU funding was provided in 1995 and 1996 to the Basque Country under each of the following budget headings: agricultural expenditure, structural actions, internal policies, etc.?

On the basis of the above, is the Basque Country a net contributor to the European Union?

If so, is it consistent with the principle of economic and social cohesion, as laid down in Article B of the Treaty on European Union, that a region whose income is 88% of the Community average should be a net contributor to the European Union?

If the Basque Country is a net contributor, does not the Commission believe that correctives should be incorporated into EU regional policy to prevent such situations from arising?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (28 April 1997)

The Commission does not possess the information requested by the Honourable Member.

Although total own resources are broken down to show the share contibuted by each Member State, the figures are not disaggregated any further. It is therefore impossible to calculate the contribution of individual regions to the Community's own resources.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1419/97 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (23 April 1997)

Subject: Animal experimentation

Does the Commission plan to bring forward any amendment to Directive 86/609 ((OJ L 358, 18.12.1986, p. 1. )) so that it specifies the level of data information to be supplied, since the Commission appears to suggest (in answer to Question H-0135/97 ((Debates of the European Parliament (March 1997). )) that this is an omission in the directive which hampers its ability to publish an accurate report on the number of laboratory animals used in experiments and has to rely on a 'gentleman's agreement'?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (22 May 1997)

An agreement has been concluded concerning the level of detail and the format of the statistical tables to be utilised for reporting statistics on the use of laboratory animals. This consensus was reached during the last meeting of the competent authorities for Directive 86/609/EEC concerning the protection of laboratory animals ((OJ L 358, 18.12.1986. )) on 16 April 1997.

Hence the Commission does not currently have any plans to amend Directive 86/609/EEC to further specify the requirements for the collection of statistical data.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0580/97 by Hugh McMahon (PSE) to the Commission (25 February 1997)

Subject: Information policy 1997

What discussions have taken place with the other Community institutions and Member States with respect to funding European information policy?

In particular, what were the conclusions of these discussions and were any specific decisions taken with regard to information policy in the United Kingdom?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0529/97 and E-0580/97 given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (14 April 1997)

The Commission is assisted in the implementation of its Community information policy by an advisory working group made up of representatives of Parliament and the Commission.

The main trends for 1997 are decentralization and direct access by the public. These are being put into practice by partnerships between the Member States, Parliament and the Commission as part of the priority information campaigns under the Prince programme entitled: 'The Euro - a Currency for Europe' and 'Building Europe Together'.

The UK has so far not wished to sign a partnership agreement.

As far as the ongoing information policy is concerned, the Commission decides on the amount to be allocated for information in each Member State at the beginning of each year, on the basis of recommendations by its Offices in the Member States. The ECU 3 million allocated to the United Kingdom in 1997 is comparable with the amounts allocated to Germany, Spain, France and Italy.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1559/97 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (6 May 1997)

Subject: Operational programme on education and initial vocational training in Greece

Sub-programme 1, measure 3, of the operational programme on education and initial vocational training in Greece covers a number of actions, including the establishment of school libraries (between 5 and 10 per prefecture), the modernization of existing libraries and their link-up with the Central Library/Data Bank.

Given that a timetable exists for this measure, will the Commission say:

1. what was the take-up rate for this measure in 1994, 1995 and 1996;

2. whether there have been any delays in take-up, and if so, what the main reasons for these delays have been; and

3. whether it is aware how much has been spent on the measure 1.3 actions set out above?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (18 June 1997)

1. The 'school libraries' action (sub-programme 1, measure 3 of the programme in question) was originally proposed and adopted in principle together with the 'education and initial training' programme in the summer of 1994. The action was subsequently analysed and plans drawn up by the Ministry of Education on the basis of the conclusions of a study on the subject, and official approval by the programme monitoring committee followed in May 1996. In view of the complexity and wide scope of the action, the monitoring committee also decided to appoint a project manager.

It follows from the above, and the Ministry of Education's plans, that there were no activities in 1994, 1995 or 1996.

2. The main reason for the delays in implementing the action is the failure to define the terms of the operation in time, principally as a result of administrative shortcomings (particularly the absence of specialised services such as a coordination service), the complexity of the operation, frequent changes in the people responsible up to April 1996, and excessive red tape.

Following preselection of a limited number of companies, the call for tenders for the selection of a project manager is now imminent.

3. The total budget for the action is around ECU 35 million, covering a pilot phase, an intermediate phase and a development phase.

In view of the importance of school libraries in improving the secondary education system, and despite the considerable delay, the Ministry of Education is currently making considerable efforts to get the measure under way as soon as possible in order to make up for the time lost.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0944/97 by Leonie van Bladel (UPE) to the Commission (13 March 1997)

Subject: Angola

Why exactly, in the light of the peace process, is the government of Angola employing 4 500 mercenaries from South Africa?

Joint answer to Written Questions E- 0943/97, E-0944/97 and E-0945/97 given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (14 May 1997)

The Commission is not a party to the Angola peace process, and does not have all the information requested by the Honourable Member.

In connection with the peace process in Angola, a mandate has been given to the United Nations for the supervision, control, and overall verification of the cease-fire, in liaison with the Angolan government and UNITA (Union nationale pour l'indépendance totale de l'Angola). The United Nations are responsible for the withdrawal, confinement and demilitarisation of all UNITA military forces, the disarming of the entire civilian population and the verification and monitoring of the Angolan national police activities. The Commission would suggest the Honourable Member seek clarifications in the recent reports addressed by the United Nations Secretary general to the Security Council.

The following information can be given to the Honourable Member concerning the questions for which the Commission is competent. The Community has been giving support to the selection and demobilisation centres. The demobilisation process has recently begun and some additional funds have been earmarked to help support the reintegration of ex-combatants in civil life. According to UNAVEM III (United nations Angola verification mission) estimates, the total cost for the demobilisation in stages of around 100 000 ex-combatants (government and UNITA troops) would be 18 MECU.

Support from the Community to Angola has been granted through different kind of measures. Humanitarian aid, food aid, rehabilitation operations and development projects have been approved. Those operations include support to the quartering areas, to displaced people and to mine clearance. The Community pledge at the round table of September 1995 was of more than 100 MECU till the end of 1997. That pledge was fully respected and even exceeded. In fact, commitments made till the end of 1996 were of 122 MECU. However, the slow pace of the implementation of the Lusaka peace protocol, and the harmful effects in terms of security and of perspectives for the future, have been hampering the carrying out of at least some of the Community interventions. The evolution of the Angolan situation will be decisive for their good outcome and for future interventions.

Finally, the Commission would remind the Honourable Member of the recent declaration of the Council, expressing its concern at the lack of progress in the peace process in Angola and stating its support for the current efforts of the United Nations Secretary general. In addition, the Council called on all parties, particularly UNITA, to comply with the terms of the peace accord and to take the necessary steps for its full implementation and the early establishment of a government of unity and national reconciliation.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1276/97 by Marianne Thyssen (PPE) to the Commission (11 April 1997)

Subject: Halting of the translation of the European periodical 'Professional Training' into all the official languages of the European Union

Since January 1997 the European periodical 'Professional Training', which is published by the European Centre for the Development of Professional Training, has been translated only into English, French, German and Spanish. Previous volumes of the periodical appeared in all the official languages of the European Union.

1. Can the Commission give the reasons why translation into all the official Community languages has been halted?

2. Was this a Cedefop decision, or was the decision taken in conjunction with the Commission?

3. Does the Commission have similar plans to restrict translation work in other institutions and/or the translation of other publications?

4. Does the Commission not take the view that this decision represents a retrograde step with regard to the transparency of Cedefop's work and communication between the Centre and European citizens?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (30 May 1997)

1. and 4. The Honourable Member may wish to refer to the Commission's answer to the Written Question E-3398/96 of Mr Alavanos ((OJ C C 91, 20.3.1997. )).

2. The reduction of the languages of the Journal was proposed by the Centre to the management board in the latter's decision concerning the approval of the work programme for 1997. The management board consists of 48 members, representing the 15 Member States'governments and social partners and three representatives of the Commission.

3. The Commission cannot comment on the languages in which other institutions publish.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0852/97 by Gunilla Carlsson (PPE) to the Commission (5 March 1997)

Subject: Propaganda in soap operas

According to reports in the Swedish media, the Commission is attempting to get popular TV programmes to spread a positive image of the EU by offering financial support to programmes which present the EU in a positive light.

Are these reports true?

If so, does the Commission consider it appropriate for the EU to buy programmes, inter alia on Member States' public service TV, for the purpose of propagating subjective political views?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (17 April 1997)

With Parliament's backing, the Commission decided in October 1995 to step up its efforts to increase public awareness of the achievements and challenges of European integration. Three priority information measures were therefore launched under the titles 'Citizens First', 'The euro, a currency for Europe' and 'Building Europe together'. At Parliament's behest, one of the various principles prompting these measures was the concern for closeness to the citizen.

Numerous measures have already been implemented through various channels of communication (the mass media, organisations representing civil society and the Commission's various relay systems and networks).

Given the public's increasing reliance on the mass media for information, it was natural for them to have been the main focus of the three measures mentioned. Communication and information measures are, for example, directed particularly at the regional mass media, the women's press, the business press, the trade union press and the free publication sector. Television is clearly the modern medium par excellence.

A working meeting held with the heads of public and private broadcasting corporations in Brussels in late January 1997 set out to identify possible partnerships on the basis of which European topics might be addressed in the area of entertainment or youth broadcasting outside the more conventional category of information programmes, determine what European television stations needed in order to meet their viewers' demand for information on European issues and explore ways and means by which the Commission could contribute to European television stations' programme projects.

At no time was the purpose of this measure to purchase television programmes as a vehicle for propagating political views.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1679/97 by Marianne Eriksson (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (7 May 1997)

Subject: Structural Funds support for printed circuit production in Scotland

The Swedish company, Ericsson, is planning to cut production of printed circuits in Sweden. The circuits have been produced in Norrköping, where very serious employment problems are likely if production is shifted elsewhere. It is expected that 700 people will lose their jobs. The company intends to subcontract printed circuit production to two multinationals, SCI System and Selectron. The bulk of production is to take place in Scotland, where SCI System has a plant in Irvine and Selectron a plant in Dunfermline.

Swedish newspapers have claimed that those factories have been developed with the aid of EU Structural Funds.

Will the Commission confirm or deny the claims made in the press that the factories in Irvine and Dunfermline have received Structural Funds support?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (2 June 1997)

The Commission has asked the Member State concerned for information regarding the facts raised to by the Honourable Member. It will inform her of its findings.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0968/97 by Mair Morgan (PSE) to the Commission (13 March 1997)

Subject: Orimulsion

Is the Commission aware of the public concern regarding the importation and burning of the bitumen based Venezuelan fuel Orimulsion?

What measures and studies has the Commission undertaken to investigate any possible harmful effects to health and the environment through either the transport or the combustion of the fuel?

Do current emissions regulations take into account the heavy particulates that are emitted by the burning of this fuel?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (6 May 1997)

Orimulsion is a liquid fuel with characteristics similar to heavy fuel oil and with a sulphur content of 2.1-2.7%. The burning of orimulsion in large combustion plants (LCPs) is regulated under Council Directive 88/609/EEC ((OJ L 336, 7.12.1988. )) on the limitation of emissions of certain pollutants into the air from large combustion plants.

For LCPs licensed after 1 July 1987, the Directive sets limit values for the emission of sulphur dioxide (SO2) nitrogen oxides (NOx) and dust. For those licensed before 1 July 1987, the Directive sets national emission ceilings for SO2 and NOx.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0325/97 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (13 February 1997)

Subject: CMO for olive oil: expenditure on refunds in Spain

The Court of Auditors' annual report for the financial year 1995 shows that the 1996 budget provided for EAGGF Guarantee Section expenditure on olive oil totalling ECU 1781 million. Even though this figure is in line with expenditure between 1991 and 1993, expenditure was far lower in 1995, when it stood at only ECU 812.5 million.

Of this expenditure, refunds on olive oil accounted for ECU 38.2 million and ECU 40 million in 1995 and 1996 respectively.

What is the total figure for expenditure in respect of refunds on olive oil in Spain?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0320/97, E-0321/97, E-0322/97, E-0323/97, E-0324/97, E-0325/97, E-0326/97, E-0327/97, E-0328/97, E-0329/97, E-0330/97, E-0331/97, E-0332/97, E-0333/97, E-0334/97, E-0335/97, E-0336/97, E-0337/97, E-0338/97, E-0339/97, E-0340/97, E-0341/97, E-0342/97, E-0343/97 and E-0344/97 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (6 March 1997)

The Honourable Member will find the figure he requests in the table below. Total Community expenditure under the 1995 and 1996 budgets was 812.5 and 2007.7 million ecus respectively. The discrepancy with the totals in the table largely relates to payments for olive oil promotion action. The 1995 budget is much lower than for 1996 (and 1994) because the 1994/95 prices package included a decision to move the payment date. This meant that the 1995 budget made no provision for 1994/95 marketing year payments but only for outstanding ones from 1993/94.

(in MECU)

>TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1669/97 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (20 May 1997)

Subject: Convention to combat desertification

What actions have been taken to encourage Member States to ratify this Convention which entered into force on 26 December 1996, and have any yet done so? Does the EU envisage ratifying it?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (6 June 1997)

Article 34 of the United Nations Convention to combat desertification requires that Member States and the Community decide on their respective responsibilities for the performance of their obligations under the Convention, and these include ratification. As at 15 May 1997, ten Member States have ratified the Convention. They are Denmark, Germany, Greece, Spain, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Finland, Sweden and United Kingdom. The Community, for its part, is in the process of ratifying it.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0654/97 by Wilfried Telkämper (V) to the Council (10 March 1997)

Subject: EU common position on Cuba

The wording of the EU common position of 2 December 1996 on Cuba ((OJ L 322, 12.12.1996, p. 1. )) is not identical in all the languages at the beginning of paragraph 2:

While the English version (negotiating language) refers to the 'tentative economic opening ... in Cuba', which is faithfully reflected in the German, Spanish and Portuguese versions, the French version contains the rather derogatory phrase 'timide ouverture', i.e. cautious opening, which is duly reproduced in the Italian, Swedish and Danish translations.

In view of the significance of this common position and of its workability, is the Council prepared to bring the relevant versions into line with the English wording?

Answer (16 June 1997)

The Council is aware of the difficulties involved in ensuring perfect agreement between the various language versions of decisions adopted by it. All these language versions must be taken into account if a problem of interpretation of the text arises. This having been said, the Council does not share the Honourable Member's opinion that the various language versions of the Council's common position on Cuba give rise to differing interpretations.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1048/97 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) and Manuela Frutos Gama (PSE) to the Commission (19 March 1997)

Subject: Tobacco production and employment

Why does the Commission wish, by introducing the new COM in tobacco, to cause serious and irreparable damage to 20 000 families who earn their living from tobacco cultivation and have no alternative source of income in an underdeveloped region such as Extremadura (Spain)?

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

The Commission is aware of the social and economic importance of tobacco growing in certain producer regions such as Extremadura in Spain. The Commission does not intend proposing measures which are prejudicial to the 20 000 farming families mentioned. On the contrary, the aim of the Commission's planned reform is to improve the farmers' material well-being by improving the quality of their production.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1266/97 by Clive Needle (PSE) to the Commission (11 April 1997)

Subject: Appraisal of Objective 5b programmes

Would the Commission provide an appraisal of the operation of Objective 5b programmes to the mid-term point of the 1994-1999 allocation, and in particular comment on the operation of UK area programmes compared to those in other Member States?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (12 May 1997)

The United Kingdom government, local partners and the Commission are currently engaged in the mid term evaluation of the objective 5b programmes. The Commission is therefore not carrying out a separate evaluation exercise.

As the evaluations for the eleven United Kingdom objective 5b regions have yet to be completed, it is premature to comment on the operation of the United Kingdom programmes. Equally it is premature to make a comparative analysis with other Member States as their evaluations also remain to be completed.

The Commission will prepare a summary of the conclusions of the mid-term review of the structural funds and will discuss operational consequences in each monitoring committee.

Publication of the interim evaluation reports for individual regions will be at the discretion of each of the monitoring committees responsible for the implementation of the objective 5b programmes.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0992/97 by Miguel Arias Cañete (PPE) to the Commission (17 March 1997)

Subject: Farmers in Denmark

Will the Commission say how many farmers there are in Denmark and how many people are directly employed in agriculture in that country at the present time?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0989/97, E-0990/97, E-0991/97, E-0992/97, E-0993/97, E-0994/97, E-0995/97, E-0996/97, E-0997/97, E-0998/97, E-0999/97, E-1000/97, E-1001/97, E-1002/97 and E-1003/97 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (2 May 1997)

Survey on the structure of farms

>TABLE>

Source: Eurostat.